Author Topic: Well maybe I am still so confused, just a little...  (Read 11079 times)

Offline thatollie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1443
Re: I don't think I'm so confused, not anymore...
« Reply #15 on: December 18, 2008, 09:21:52 PM »
In fact I think JY might be agreeing with you, he puts the poem in a box and it tells him not to.
Or I've struck upon a layer he didn't intend. [which also happened in a critique of one of his novels.]
Never make a decision standing up.

Offline eric

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10576
Re: I don't think I'm so confused, not anymore...
« Reply #16 on: December 18, 2008, 09:42:49 PM »
Well, Gray, you make a plausible question here, but I really don't think you've shown you're qualified to answer it.  I wish you would, but you don't.  The contents of the thread, at least, seem to be simple expressions of opinion without much to back it up.   Let's remember something you always forget, which is that facts are your friend.  Also recall that when I mentioned Apollonaire, a demonstrably greater poet than you or me, who invented this form, you said bah humburg it's only performance art.  A rather laughable statement, since Apollonaire did not perform in the sense of performance art at all.  He was simply too French for that.  John Yamrus, who can't really be a fairly close ally of yours on this point, created a witty piece of concrete poetry that you likewise dismissed as performance art.   This ignores the fact that the box made by Yamrus cannot be performed.  Again you did not use reasons, other than that the sounds are not altered by the shape. 

Okay, with that background let us engage in some analysis.  We can use the Yamrus piece.  Recall that a poem is defined, and you have approved this definition, as a collection of words that evokes an emotion in the reader that is different than the meanings of the words themselves as put down on the page.  Clearly the sonic qualities of the words are of much import, which is why all poems should be read when being understood.  As the Yamrus box illustrates, though, the simple meaning of the words can be amplified, bent, made ironic or any number of other things by a good shape that they may make.  Obviously, therefore, the shape of a concrete poem can lend to and influence the evoked emotion, which means that a good concrete poem is in fact poetry, contrary to your unsupported assertion that it is not.  I don't particularly care for concrete poems, except when they are witty and well constructed as is Yamrus's, but you are simply wrong that they are not poetic.

Ollie, I think Yamrus did intend that very level of irony.  Which proves my point, by the way.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2008, 10:08:17 PM by eric »

Offline Akeith (Gray)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2583
  • Waiting for a drink...
Re: I don't think I'm so confused, not anymore...
« Reply #17 on: December 18, 2008, 10:35:36 PM »

eric:

Thanks for joining this discussion. I for one am always glad to read what you have to say; your opinions have always provoked considerable thought with me and have at times been entertaining as well.

My quailifications to state my own opinions stem from the very fact that I make a point of sayng I am only giving my opinion. Granted, there are those (dead or alive) who would agree with you about the arrangement of words into picture form on a page in an effort to enhance or influence the emotional impact of a poem or poetic writing. It is still, however, a very visual effect that, when added to the composition, does nothing to elevate the emotional response that the very words spoken aloud could not do.

If a poem requires, or simply employes a visual gimmick, then it ceases to be a poem by the very definition you have provided. One may as well paint or provide a picture to illustrate a given poem and say the picture is a part of the poem. I suppose that it how new genres are formed, how new schools of thought are pondered into existence.

My goodness, I was not seeking allies in this discussion, not from John Yarmus or HaroHalola or thatollie or you. I was just posing a question or rather at best a speculative thought regarding so-called "concrete poetry". In my opinion, "concrete poetry" is and still remains a visual art and when the reader is engaged and takes time to decipher it, the poem becomes a performance piece. The reader, not the writer, becomes the "performer" by the very act of trying to read words constructed into the form of a visual picture.

Of course, this again is only my opinion, backed by my personal preferences. I am not attempting to present an essay of pursuasion or an academic paper supporting any particualar hypothesis about what is or is not "concrete poetry".

Gray

Offline thatollie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1443
Re: I don't think I'm so confused, not anymore...
« Reply #18 on: December 18, 2008, 10:38:56 PM »
Quote
Ollie, I think Yamrus did intend that very level of irony.  Which proves my point, by the way.
We may get an definite answer, I wouldn't be surprised if he blessed this topic with another viewpoint.
Never make a decision standing up.

Offline eric

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10576
Re: I don't think I'm so confused, not anymore...
« Reply #19 on: December 18, 2008, 10:45:07 PM »
Ollie--Yamrus always surprises me.  My hallucinations are often different than his reality, which makes for interesting contrasts.

Gray--now, that was what I was  looking for.  A little backing up of your opinions.  Good job.  Now, look at my definiton.  It says "a collection of words arranged on a page."  Says nothing as to how.  A collection can be boxed shape.  And the shapes can do more than just influence the words, as I intimated.  They can contradict them.  Look at some of Apollonaire's poems. 

Thanks for the joust, dude.

Offline Akeith (Gray)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2583
  • Waiting for a drink...
Re: I don't think I'm so confused, not anymore...
« Reply #20 on: December 18, 2008, 10:51:54 PM »
eric:

My pleasure. I'm glad you joined in.

I will certainly explore more of Apollionaire's writing. Too bad he is long gone. I would have loved to correspond with him. Can't you just imagine it?

(...so, you hallucinate, too? I hope yours are every bit as interesting as mine have been...  ;) )

Offline thatollie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1443
Re: I don't think I'm so confused, not anymore...
« Reply #21 on: December 18, 2008, 11:00:14 PM »
Quote
(...so, you hallucinate, too? I hope yours are every bit as interesting as mine have been...   ;))
The joust of three hallucinators, I do so hope I've held my own.

Some Apollinaire here, none of them concrete.
http://tkline.pgcc.net/PITBR/French/Apollinaire.htm

His poem about the peacock is rather amusing, same with the lion.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2008, 11:02:35 PM by thatollie »
Never make a decision standing up.

Offline Akeith (Gray)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2583
  • Waiting for a drink...
Re: I don't think I'm so confused, not anymore...
« Reply #22 on: December 18, 2008, 11:13:01 PM »
You certainly did hold your own, ollie. Just try not to "go into the light".  :D

Thanks for the link.

Offline Jade

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 802
Re: I don't think I'm so confused, not anymore...
« Reply #23 on: December 19, 2008, 10:08:05 AM »
Quote (from Gray) In my opinion, "concrete poetry" is and still remains an visual art and when the reader is engaged and takes time to decipher it, the poem becomes a performance piece. The reader, not the writer, becomes the "performer" by the very act of trying to read words constructed into the form of a visual picture poem. Unquote

At the risk of sounding like a complete fool, I'd like to say what I see, in Gray's (amended) words - above. Apologies Gray.


P.S. Not every poem - in fact very little poems - can be fully understood at first sight. That's what makes it a challenge. And being involved in the performing - in order to understand it - is an honor.

Maybe I'm mistaken, maybe I'm not - just my impression.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2008, 12:16:15 PM by Jade »
Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self.
Cyril Connolly

"A coward is incapable of exhibiting love; it is the prerogative of the brave." ~Mohandas Gandhi

Offline Akeith (Gray)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2583
  • Waiting for a drink...
Re: I don't think I'm so confused, not anymore...
« Reply #24 on: December 19, 2008, 11:02:08 AM »
Hello Jade,

I like your comments. Odd way of changing my idea...capsulizing it with your edit.

So, do you think that any reader of a poem (a concrete one or not) is a performing artist? An interesting idea, the way you put it. I am not sure I entirely agree with you, though.

Gray
« Last Edit: December 19, 2008, 11:12:14 AM by Gray »

Offline Jade

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 802
Re: Well maybe I am still so confused, just a little...
« Reply #25 on: December 19, 2008, 11:48:53 AM »
Hi Gray

May I ask how you read a poem. Do you not mentally perform it, visualizing the significance of it? Is it only me?

Yes, I think every reader sows the threads of the poem together in their own manner, and a good poem is one where the outcome is the same active play, when done by different 'performers'.

As someone I discussed this with put it: "The performing artist in the mind, making the words come to life ... that is what a poetry reader should do... the poet is supposed to write for that interchange. The poet must put down his or her words in a way that they come to life in the mind of the reader.  This is why abstractions are so bad.  When the words come to  life in a new mental landscape and express or infer a new set of emotions there, that is what poetry is all about. Poetry does not occur on the page.  It occurs in the brain of the reader."

With that being said, I agree, however...the 'tree-image' as you described, would not qualify as poetry in my accord, but rather a readable painting.

 
« Last Edit: December 19, 2008, 12:06:50 PM by Jade »
Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self.
Cyril Connolly

"A coward is incapable of exhibiting love; it is the prerogative of the brave." ~Mohandas Gandhi

Offline eric

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10576
Re: Well maybe I am still so confused, just a little...
« Reply #26 on: December 19, 2008, 12:16:40 PM »
Who is that someone you talk with on the side, Jade?  Should I be jealous?  Whoever it is, he's right.  Poetry exists to have a life of its own, a kind of performance art of the mind. 

Offline Jade

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 802
Re: Well maybe I am still so confused, just a little...
« Reply #27 on: December 19, 2008, 12:19:51 PM »
Hi Eric

Yeah, be jealous, be very jealous. I was conversing with my (what's the male word for muse... could it be divine afflatus?)

And yeah, he's always right.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2008, 12:29:56 PM by Jade »
Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self.
Cyril Connolly

"A coward is incapable of exhibiting love; it is the prerogative of the brave." ~Mohandas Gandhi

Offline Akeith (Gray)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2583
  • Waiting for a drink...
Re: Well maybe I am still so confused, just a little...
« Reply #28 on: December 19, 2008, 01:49:03 PM »
Jade:

To answer your question...I read a poem outloud, slowly, trying to adopt the sonics of it (or the way it is written to sound) with the use of line breaks and punctuations provided by the poet. I believe poetry is an oral art form derived from words written and placed on a page that (as eric puts it) 'evoke an emotional response in the reader' when the words are read outloud. Consequently, reading a poem is not strictly a mental engagement as, for example, reading a short story or novel.

In my opinion, a poem engages the emotions of the reader and should be written as clearly as possible by the writer. This, then, is why I believe abstractions are for the most part out of place in a poem. It would seem to me that the best way to convey an idea in a poem is by employing the five senses, to show the reader the intent rather than tell. As a result, the reader is able to experience the emotional response provoked by the poem rather than to just imagine it. With the use of abstractions, the reader in effect is forced to speculate what the writer means rather to actually feel by way of senual images what the writer is trying to communicate.

The emotional experince gained through the five senses is what makes a poem an art form. Abstract thoughts in a poem do not directly engage the reader on an emotional level.

I am sure the above is just my opinion and I do not claim that anyone should or should not agree with me. I am also certain there are other members here who could explain more clearly what I mean.

Gray

Offline Mark H

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19722
  • Middleclass Machismo now available.
Re: Well maybe I am still so confused, just a little...
« Reply #29 on: December 19, 2008, 05:42:25 PM »
F
L
O
O
D

G
A
T
E
S     

O
F

P
R
O
G
R
E
S
S     

There's
     always
          someone
               trying
                     to hold
                          them back.........
                               WHOOOSH>>>>>>>>>>>gray
« Last Edit: December 19, 2008, 05:52:46 PM by Mark. »
Buy Bristle Side Down, The Man Who Wore Brown Shoes and Middleclass Machismo here:
http://www.lulu.com/shop/search.ep?contributorId=570142

If poetry is not your thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PueM04F0Qz8 or: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0Zm8cj9MGg