Page 4 of 8
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 7:32 pm
A good suggestion, Kush..................less is better!!!
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 9:28 pm
Hi Moonlight ~
I agree that I need not be a chef to determine if there's too much salt, etc. Without writing [or having studied poetry ~ one of other, possible, acceptable responses to my query, "Just what are your credentials....." (the implication of that being that there are credentials, other than writing poetry, for being judge and jury); another might be having attended many poetry readings by professional/even amateur poets; or even having read the works of many famous poets and/or understanding the principles of various types of poetry].......anything, Moonlight, with some substance, other than being a pedestrian who calls him/herself a "hack" wandering into a humungous kitchen and sampling everything, only to determine there's not a bloody good dish in the lot! You speak with such a broad brush, regarding a couple years' worth of writing, by a wide variety of people, from a wide variety of places. It just doesn't wash.
You missed the intentional overstatement and point made by Byron. Perhaps you've missed some excellent poems, as well.
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:29 am
I am happy to see that George is receiving the attention he deserves. Even severe critics (and I mean "critic" in a good sense) such as Moonlight recognize his ability. Wonderful!
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 11:53 am
Ves, you are a breath of fresh air.............miaaaaooow.
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 4:04 pm
I don't think it is necessary to give you a run-down on my educational background in order to justify anything I have written about the poetry here. Nothing I would say would prove anything.
I didn't miss Byron's overstatements and points either. Speaking of overstatements, I just read Byron's "Story." Quite frankly, he's beginning to scare the hell out of me.
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 6:27 pm
Hi Moonlight ~
You would do well to not take on the role of expert, if you're unwilling to produce credentials. Not one of the options I offered required revelation of your education. If you have the credentials that you are unwilling to speak of, why don't you put them to better use here? Spread the wealth of your knowledge[by applying it vs. citing or claiming it], rather than your stock of venom. Provide constructive criticism and feedback.
If you didn't miss Byron's overstatement, you could have done much better in writing a response that made that obvious, or at least apparent. So, why is it that you visit this section, when you seem bound to leave with a feeling of discontent about what you saw and read here? Trash mags are virtually a dime a dozen at checkout counters. You could read that 'trash' just as easily, even moreso. No wasting of electricity. Don't have to be seated at your computer or drag along a laptop. Can stick the paper inside your coat.
Actually, Byron's piece is rather reminiscent of a song by Eminem, except the mother 'rode along' to the beach in the trunk of Daddy's car. Eminem's made millions. I was concerned about him, but later reports have been much more encouraging on him.
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 11:24 pm
What is your obsession with vetting people who don't hold the same opinion as yourself about the quality of the poetry here? I don't ask you about your
So, why is it that you visit this section, when you seem bound to leave with a feeling of discontent about what you saw and read here?
Once again, I don't have any feelings of discontent when I read the poetry section. You have to understand that not everyone is as emotionally involved with what goes on here as you are. One is perfectly capable of reading the efforts here without becoming unglued emotionally. Negatively or positively.
Trash mags are virtually a dime a dozen at checkout counters. You could read that 'trash' just as easily, even moreso. No wasting of electricity. Don't have to be seated at your computer or drag along a laptop. Can stick the paper inside your coat.
I never said the "poems" here were trash. I just questioned their validity as poetry.
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 11:33 pm
Moonlight, I understand now what you have been able to clarify. How to validate something is the question. I have similar problems when I read articles extolling the art of 'artists' such as Andy Warhol, Hockney, Tracey Emin, and Rap Artists. To each their own eh?
pax fobiscum (I think that's right
Any mis-spelt name is an error and not a silly ploy.
Any 'poem' which causes a reaction/response is a 'poem' per se, is it not. Like it or loathe it, it has proved its validity by your response to it. I do believe that I have just blown my argument about Warhol etc., etc., clean out of the water.
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 7:28 am
Sorry to jump in here in the middle of a thread. I have been lurking around here for a long time and apologize for not posting more. I appreciate the way you all greet new posters so warmly and I'm sorry that I've not been able to join in. Like Evelyn said in another post, I've resolved to post here more this year because there are so many good people who share my passion for Leonard.
I have followed the on-going arguments about the poetry here and I've even posted a couple (very bad) poems. I have a couple of observations to make, as it seems so contentious here at times. While I am not a poetry expert, in the sense that I am not a professor of English Literature, I have studied poetry since my college days and wrote papers as an undergrad that were always well accepted by the profs. This may only qualify me as a sophomoric literary critic, but I always took to heart what one of my old profs said, "Even if you are going to be an amateur scholar, you need to know many background facts, plus you'll need to continue reading long after you've left this course." I've tried to follow his advice.
Writing poetry is generally a very difficult task. One has to be concerned with meter, style, avoiding cliches, including enough fresh thoughts to engage the reader, the sound of words set to music, and the challenge of being compared continually to a body of work that stretches back to Homer and the Bible. W.B. Yeats (one of my favorites) wrote in his "Adam's Curse" poem:
'A line will take us hours maybe;
Yet if it does not seem a moment's thought,
Our stitching and unstitching has been naught.
Better go down upon your marrow-bones
And scrub a kitchen pavement, or break stones
Like an old pauper, in all kinds of weather;
For to articulate sweet sounds together
Is to work harder than all these, and yet
Be thought an idler by the noisy set
Of bankers, schoolmasters, and clergymen
The martyrs call the world.'
If you look at this, it reads through so smoothly, yet you can go back and look at the meter, style, rhymes; there is so much there, yet it truly appears seamless. To do this is extremely difficult. Another one of my favorite poets, William Carlos Williams, wrote a poem that I absolutely love called, "Asphodel, That Greeny Flower." It is a love poem to his wife, Flossie, (a rarity these days or any days) containing such brilliant lines as:
My heart rouses
thinking to bring you news
that concerns you
and concerns many men. Look at
what passes for the new.
You will not find it there but in
It is difficult
to get the news from poems
yet men die miserably every day
of what is found there.
Hear me out
for I too am concerned
and every man
who wants to die at peace in his bed
Yet there has been criticism of this poem such as this: "Asphodel, That Greeny Flower" is not, perhaps, a perfect poem. Some have felt its final vision of Flossie as bride, "a girl so pale / and ready to faint / that I pitied / and wanted to protect you," to be condescending." (Anne Fisher-Wirth)
I've also followed a group of scholars who analyse Thomas Hardy's poetry and look for forced ryhmns or words chosen strictly for meter rather than for meaning. In other words, to criticize poetry doesn't mean that one doesn't love it.
I would never attempt to apply these literary standards to the poetry here in this section as it is not appropriate. These poems seem to me to be heartfelt efforts that are not directed toward the art of poetry, but rather reflect the emotion from which all poetry pours forth. Should someone want to offer these as something substantial, they should (and I'm sure would) submit them to a more professional source.
So it is easy to understand that both our wonderful poet/contributors and art critics are using completely different standards and really shouldn't be at odds.
One last note, I don't know many of you personally (but hope to soon in New York!), but our written persona can be so different from our in-the-flesh presence. For example, I found our own, Heretic, to be a quite fun-loving and entertaining person on Hydra.
All the best,
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 4:29 pm
Any 'poem' which causes a reaction/response is a 'poem' per se, is it not. Like it or loathe it, it has proved its validity by your response to it.
I can't remember which of the rules of logic are applicable in this case...whether you are using a circular argument or just begging the question...maybe both...in any case I think Andy Warhol was more con than artist.
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 5:31 pm
Vesuvius, shame on you for trying to encourage the crap that george wright calls "poetry". And Byron, you idiot and even Moonlight to a certain extent.
You should all follow the lines and laws laid down by Heretic, the master, towards the dribble that wright spews out almost to the same extent as Lizzytysh.
Both these two undesirables should be excommunicated.
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 9:46 pm
Hi Joe ~
Thank you for your substantive contribution to this thread, and for putting your commentary in context, via your experience in regard to poetry. Last night, I looked up poem/poetry/verse/metrical/and a couple other words found within the definitions. My plan was to bring them here for reference purposes. If we are to talk about what is not poetry, we should at least talk about what poetry is. I have not taken any poetry classes, and I don't post any of my attempts in that realm. However, I also tend very rarely to speak in terms of what is 'good,' but rather what affects/impacts me, how, and why. I admire those who have posted their poetry/poetry attempts here.
I absolutely agree on your commentary regarding the lack of 'motive,' 'intention,' et al by our contributors here to go down in history as an acclaimed poet, or a poet at all. Nor is it necessary that they aspire to those heights. [This issue has, in fact, been discussed in depth some time ago.] Yet, that does not mean that there are not some poems here that are, indeed, "poetry" and, in fact, good/very good/excellent poems at that. The styles of literature and poetry have changed through the years. Free verse emerged as a legitimate form of writing, to be considered in the "poetry" category, and unlike prose or poetry to be considered wholly within those categories.
I also feel that there is an egregious lack of understanding of how the world's situation, with layer upon layer of tragic and horrendous events, personally impacts all of us. As they generate fear, stress, and sorrow, the spirit reaches both out and within for survival. Writing poetry/attempting to write poetry is a soul-soothing activity, despite the stress of the process. If more of us dealt with daily stresses through the act of writing, trying to concentrate everything into poetic form, the world would be better for it.
The comments that have arisen with me from out of the last several postings are that some people certainly sound like their 'master,' and that individuality is a worthwhile endeavour. The question that has arisen with me from out of the last several postings is, "How many goodbyes before the final one?"
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2004 12:29 am
I would just like to distance myself from any comments made about me here.
I am not responsible.
Joe, 'partisan' never went to Hydra.
I hope that clears things up for you.
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2004 1:18 am
Hmmm. I heard he did ~ in full gear.
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2004 1:22 am
I don't know if I can follow the lines and laws of Heretic, the master...after all he liked SC's poem.