Poetry Discussions(#1: Message versus Form) - Page 4 - Writers Forum

Edgewise · 10-22-2007, 10:59 PM

Quote:

If you are writing poems with "messages" STOP. RIGHT NOW. That's not what poems are for and every cockamamie nitwit on the block is out there writing non-poetic doggrel because they think they have a message.

And just who the fuck are you to say what poems are for? If I intend to write a poem with a message and utilize poetic device, than what should stop me? The idea that others are doing the same thing? Language is near infinite and as such, there are near infinite ways of writing a poem. Messages included.

ms. vodka · 10-23-2007, 11:42 AM

Quote:

she feels form is emphasized over meaning on this board.

AH HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH!!! AHHHHHH! HAHAHAHHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

sigh.

now that i'm over that, good poetry is able to marry form with message, regardless of whether the poet is using free verse or writing a sestina or any such other form.

it's never one or the other.

that's the challenge. that's the craft. that's the art.

Foxee · 10-23-2007, 12:29 PM

Thanks, ms. vodka! I like how you put that.

Edit: It seems to me that poetry is a powerful enough medium, when done well, to not only carry a message but to carry it memorably through time.

vangoghsear · 10-23-2007, 12:49 PM

This question is raised constantly in visual art: Art-for-art's-sake or art with a message? I've been taught by art teachers that believe art merely has to be, other teachers I have had insist that art must say something.

Art-for-art's-sake opened the door for abstract art. "But what is it?" was no longer a relevant question.

Symbolist art works are some of my favorites they are loaded with messages, hidden meanings, visual metaphors look at the magic realist Peter Blume's "Eternal City" or "The Rock" sometime.

The same can be said of poetry, poetry does not have to mean anything or have a message. But if poetry does have a message, doesn't mean it can't be poetry.

ms. vodka · 10-23-2007, 02:08 PM

a poem always conveys a message, but that doesn't mean the message needs to be moralistic.

a poem's message can be as simple as:

i hurt
i love
i need
apples are tasty
cats are graceful
murder is wrong

or they can be very very complicated or a weaving of multiple messages.

the art comes in play in regard to how the poet says what they're saying without just saying it, but by showing it, by attempting to make their reader feel what they feel through the use of the tools the poet has at hand. the more of these tools a poet acquires, the better they become, the better their work becomes.

no one wants a moral shoved down their throat. that's why stepping on a soapbox never works. that's why telling without showing rarely works.

it's important to remember though, that rules are there to be broken, but you can't really break the rules unless you're actually aware of the rules you're breaking.

if you love poetry, read it. learn it. step outside your comfort zone. there's no good in saying that form is bad or free verse is bad. it's all potentially excellent when it's done right.

lin · 10-23-2007, 07:03 PM

Well not around here, where it would be called a manzana.
It's not longer what it is, it's become what you call it. In your mind anyway.
Try something less simplistic. If you call something a "jack", what does that make it?

Now try, if you call something "God" or "destiny"....is it still what you thought you meant to say? And if you call it that to somebody else did you communicate the thing to them, or somethin different?

There are deeper levels to the koan and our understanding of it. One place it leads is to physics, where describing things actually changes them.

female_writer · 10-23-2007, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ilasir Maroa

I read an interesting comment from female_writer, which said that she feels form is emphasized over meaning on this board. I do not propose to debate that. But I do think it would be interesting to discuss the virtues of message versus poetic form. Almost all the threads here are poems being posted for critique, and I think there are just some things that can't be adressed in a single critique thread. Anybody interested in some basic discussions of poetry in general(starting with the quote from FW)?

Ilasir,

Im so sorry. Im in self imposed exile so didnt even notice this thread until just now.

Let me clarify; When I said form is emphasized over content I meant that we as writers, hence with the eye of a writer, tend to look for a structure that jumps out at us and says "Here I am!!! Now that this poem fits into your narrow view of what constitutes a good poem, you may continue reading!"

Ive learned a thing about poetry.A non-structured abstract piece is just as (if not more) difficult to do well than one thats melodic, rhyming and heavily structured. I think its because when we are working within a tight framework its easier to do the "Lets see, what rymes with hat?Oh I know, CAT!" routine, wheras the looser piece requires the writer (and reader) to dig a bit deeper, but the payoff is sweet.

Btw- Im a fan of the highly structured old poems of The Masters and also modern poetry and The Beat stuff. Im deeply indebted and humbled in the presence of all literary greatness, no matter what genre it may fall into.

Ilasir Maroa · 10-23-2007, 07:37 PM

Ah, I see.

Well, I think it was an interesting point either way, and actually discussing such issues outside of critique threads can have benefits to the people on this board. I think many of us are still learning, and abstract(lol) discussions seperate from works with time and effort invested in them can help to clarify many things that can be applied to a poet's style as a whole, and not just to individual pieces.

I want you to know that I was in no way implying anything negative, or making a judgement about your comment.

ms. vodka · 10-23-2007, 07:48 PM

abstraction has nothing to do with form.

heavily structured poems can be abstract.

too much abstraction will sink a piece though.

and also come across ass pretentious, in most cases.

female_writer · 10-23-2007, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ms. vodka

abstraction has nothing to do with form.

heavily structured poems can be abstract.

too much abstraction will sink a piece though.

and also come across ass pretentious, in most cases.

I see you are attempting to "take me on" ms. vodka.
Well, good for you, but you better batten down your hatches first.

Ilasir- Of course I wasnt offended!!

I just felt bad enough that I didnt see this thread that it forced me to come out of retirement to reply to you. *smile*

And as an addendum, as far as meaning goes of course any poem can be anything it wants, I dont think ms. v. understands what you/I meant. A great example of EXACTLY what I was referring to is whats going on with L00kback's poem in WW right now....the intense and deeply implied meaning was completely dimissed by a few simply because it wasnt structured enough for their liking.

Baron · 10-23-2007, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by female_writer

I see you are attempting to "take me on" ms. vodka.
Well, good for you, but you better batten down your hatches first.

Ilasir- Of course I wasnt offended!!

I just felt bad enough that I didnt see this thread that it forced me to come out of retirement to reply to you. *smile*

And as an addendum, as far as meaning goes of course any poem can be anything it wants, I dont think ms. v. understands what you/I meant. A great example of EXACTLY what I was referring to is whats going on with L00kback's poem in WW right now....the intense and deeply implied meaning was completely dimissed by a few simply because it wasnt structured enough for their liking.

I'm not sure what this is but I know I've trodden in it a few times.

female_writer · 10-23-2007, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baron

I'm not sure what this is but I know I've trodden in it a few times.

^^ Deflection.

Voodoo · 10-23-2007, 11:13 PM

Fucking twats.

Dannyboy said It is what I say it is;

a poem is a poem if it has line breaks. If it doesn't, then it has to have metaphor. If it doesn't, then it has to have

Well, fuck. If the op says it's a poem and most of the people out there can say it's a poem, good or dogshit, it's a poem.

So, in that poem, there's form and meaning. Form would be the shit that tells the person it's a poem, metaphor (though this can be the form, too, if you're limber) is the meaning. Saying something;

So, in that poem,
there's form and meaning.
Form would be the//

A poem. No metaphor, nothing but form. It has a message, though. As to how good it is, it's very likely up to the reader. An intelligent reader will say it's garbage, a moron will say Lol iss funny and walk the fuck off.

If we're about free verse against rigidity, there is

Across this lake
I do take
fortune and bitches
to keep Pac's riches

as opposed to

across
this lake, I
do take fortune,
and bitches to keep Pac's
riches

Same message, differing forms. Both are pretty bad.

However, neither have an outright moral. I'm not saying anything about anything, other than what my feet are doing.

Vodka doesn't like preachy shit, and Dannyboy likes to go the subtle route. That's not the same thing, right? One is moral and the other is straight message -- so, what the fuck do you want?

Poetry is good poetry if it's good poetry. Roundabout -- an apple that's good is a fucking good apple. If I want that apple, if I want a good apple, I'll call it an apple in my head; I will not think of it as sin, I will not create a moral as to some parody to that nude bitch. I will take that thing I've learned to call an apple, and eat it.

Here, lin would be proud;

"If it it works, take it true, motherfucker."

It's about intention. If I set out to make the reader think and they think, I've made well. To feel and they feel, I've made well. To notice the vapid nonsense but marvel at the construction, and they do so, I've made well. Lin, as always, is on some deep Charlatan philosophical <insertion> that goes over just about every word written in the thread. Yes, I'm annoyed if a poem tells me what to think. I'm annoyed if it's written in shitty format that just screams IDON'TFUCKINGKNOW. If, however, I can tell the detail the poet's put into it, even if it's for that aesthetic, I can be impressed.

It's a tool, poetry. Little of it will be timeless and thinking about thinking about something which will make it something else is a rather Fucked Up way to do things, isn't it?

Baron · 10-23-2007, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by female_writer

^^ Deflection.

A metaphor

female_writer · 10-23-2007, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by German Voodoo

Fucking twats.

Dannyboy said It is what I say it is;

a poem is a poem if it has line breaks. If it doesn't, then it has to have metaphor. If it doesn't, then it has to have

Well, fuck. If the op says it's a poem and most of the people out there can say it's a poem, good or dogshit, it's a poem.

So, in that poem, there's form and meaning. Form would be the shit that tells the person it's a poem, metaphor (though this can be the form, too, if you're limber) is the meaning. Saying something;

So, in that poem,
there's form and meaning.
Form would be the//

A poem. No metaphor, nothing but form. It has a message, though. As to how good it is, it's very likely up to the reader. An intelligent reader will say it's garbage, a moron will say Lol iss funny and walk the fuck off.

If we're about free verse against rigidity, there is

Across this lake
I do take
fortune and bitches
to keep Pac's riches

as opposed to

across
this lake, I
do take fortune,
and bitches to keep Pac's
riches

Same message, differing forms. Both are pretty bad.

However, neither have an outright moral. I'm not saying anything about anything, other than what my feet are doing.

Vodka doesn't like preachy shit, and Dannyboy likes to go the subtle route. That's not the same thing, right? One is moral and the other is straight message -- so, what the fuck do you want?

Poetry is good poetry if it's good poetry. Roundabout -- an apple that's good is a fucking good apple. If I want that apple, if I want a good apple, I'll call it an apple in my head; I will not think of it as sin, I will not create a moral as to some parody to that nude bitch. I will take that thing I've learned to call an apple, and eat it.

Here, lin would be proud;

"If it it works, take it true, motherfucker."

It's about intention. If I set out to make the reader think and they think, I've made well. To feel and they feel, I've made well. To notice the vapid nonsense but marvel at the construction, and they do so, I've made well. Lin, as always, is on some deep Charlatan philosophical <insertion> that goes over just about every word written in the thread. Yes, I'm annoyed if a poem tells me what to think. I'm annoyed if it's written in shitty format that just screams IDON'TFUCKINGKNOW. If, however, I can tell the detail the poet's put into it, even if it's for that aesthetic, I can be impressed.

It's a tool, poetry. Little of it will be timeless and thinking about thinking about something which will make it something else is a rather Fucked Up way to do things, isn't it?

Baby, that aint no post ^^ its a blog!

Youre quite the bottomliner, arent you? Ha,good work