Poetry Discussion(#2: Elitist Poetry,lol) - Writers Forum

Ilasir Maroa · 10-23-2007, 07:13 PM

I encountered some friction in a recent thread of mine. After hearing the opinions of several people whom I respect greatly in the area of poetry, I took a piece, entitled "I Am What I Am" to some people I know who are not poets in their personal or professional lives. I found that their opinions on the poem were in opposition to the veiw of many of the comments recieved in this forum.

The question I believe this presents is fairly simple in its concept, if hard to state well.

"Does the poet's ability to understand poetic devices cause them to unintentionally overlook devices that may not be as clear or obvious to a causal reader?"

In essence, is it possible for someone who writes and studies poetry to see something like a metaphor or line break as completely clear, when it may in fact be incomprehensible to the average reader?

I fear I may have stated this question in a rather mangled manner, but I hope people will get the gist of it's meaning.

Baron · 10-23-2007, 07:22 PM

I often appreciate the views of those who simply read and enjoy poetry above those of other poets. When it comes to other poets it always pays to balance what's said in a review because there are often motives for what is said that go beyond the poem. For my own part I try to give an honest opinion if I do comment on a work, no more than that. I don't expect my opinion to be taken as law but simply weighed up and considered if someone has posted a work asking for critique.

Writing elitist problem has one big problem attached to it, it only appeals to an elite (or people who consider themselves such)

If the joy is taken out of what you do then there's no longer any real point in doing it.

TinyMachines · 10-23-2007, 07:25 PM

I get what you're saying. I have wondered that sometimes myself. I think it does make a huge difference, so I try to write for the average person. I like my messages to be rather vague. Anyone that sees through my poetry usually categorizes everything about it and identifies all the parts. it's like a recipe that they specifically don't like. When it's a surprise, you are more prone to like or dislike it without thinking right away what the ingredients are that you are tasting.

dannyboy · 10-23-2007, 07:27 PM

on the other hand if you write what the audience want we'd all end up writing reality TV shows.

Ilasir Maroa · 10-23-2007, 07:32 PM

A good point Dannyboy.

But I think it's important for all writers, poets or otherwise, to realize that you have to watch out for things that make since to people who know your work, or filed in general, but might not reach a new reader.

Baron · 10-23-2007, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannyboy

on the other hand if you write what the audience want we'd all end up writing reality TV shows.

That isn't what I'm saying. What I write varies, my style varies, it all depends pretty much on what I feel at the time. I'm not trying to score any points with what I do. The truth is that I enjoy all forms of poetry, classical and modern and I feel sad for those who think that only modern form has a place any more. Like those who think that classical music no longer has a place but there are still people composing great classical pieces.

ms. vodka · 10-23-2007, 07:56 PM

if you are writing well, your poetry can be read and appreciated on many different levels. another poet may see deeper into a metaphor, or notice that you've used extended metaphor, or how well your poem is metered.

to a person unfamiliar with poetry, they may take away a simpler message, enjoy how the alliteration sounds or interpret it differently than you intended.

but any interpretation of a poem is okay really.

worrying that a lay person might not understand your work is no excuse to be lazy and say oh well i don't care and call those who seek to perfect their craft 'elitist'. i mean, would you call an accomplished painter elitist because they've taken the time to learn their craft?

that's just silly.

Baron · 10-23-2007, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ms. vodka

if you are writing well, your poetry can be read and appreciated on many different levels. another poet may see deeper into a metaphor, or notice that you've used extended metaphor, or how well your poem is metered.

to a person unfamiliar with poetry, they may take away a simpler message, enjoy how the alliteration sounds or interpret it differently than you intended.

but any interpretation of a poem is okay really.

worrying that a lay person might not understand your work is no excuse to be lazy and say oh well i don't care and call those who seek to perfect their craft 'elitist'. i mean, would you call an accomplished painter elitist because they've taken the time to learn their craft?

that's just silly.

I respect the fact that you have a very well balanced view. Unfortunately there are others who do not and think that there was no poetry before Kerouac. As a visiual artist I agree that in all that we do we aim to grow and improve. The problem arises when people try to confine the limits by pouring scorn on what doesn't fir their own view of poetry. This is a narrow view and is, in effect poetic fascism.

Eiji Tunsinagi · 10-23-2007, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ms. vodka

if you are writing well, your poetry can be read and appreciated on many different levels. another poet may see deeper into a metaphor, or notice that you've used extended metaphor, or how well your poem is metered.

to a person unfamiliar with poetry, they may take away a simpler message, enjoy how the alliteration sounds or interpret it differently than you intended.

Exactly. I think a poem should appear simple but have deeper movements in it. Then it is accessible to all. If it reads deep and speaks even deeper volumes, then yes, that may be all well and good, but only the initiated and skilled will find the substance in it (and sometimes, not even them).

I think a work can be perfected without being elitist. And a work can be simple without being lazy. Usually the simplest of poems that is successful is written by the greatest of poets. The ones that don't have to blatantly show off.

Voodoo · 10-23-2007, 08:33 PM

There's a large difference between poetic masturbation, and poetic mastery.

Frankly, I enjoy a poem better if I've constructed it well. Verse has many options in it, and I try to employ some.

It's your audience. If you write for a lot of dumbasses, then write for them and bugger off. Not that poetry should (in that term) be for poets to read, no, look at, as Eiji mentioned, Simic. No great formal tones there, not many devices, but it's good poetry. Li Young Lee is another fairly simple poet who's pretty good.

The fact is, you'd damn well better know what rules you're breaking before you break them. You can't cover it by saying it's my style unless you actually thought, I know this but blah, fuck it.

Otherwise, you're little more than an amateur.

I don't think The Waste Land is all that accessible, but look how much fame it has. Other shit you read in some church weekly review is barely poetry.

There is no such thing as Elitist Poetry. There's poetry made by people who know what the fuck they're doing and there's a lot of poetry made by people who don't know jack.

If your audience is intelligent, write Intelligently.

However, muddled shit is just as amateur. If you don't know what you wrote, you're little better than the kid who just cut his wrists a little and wrote about the Alpha and the Omega.

The Old Poets are great. Why we still mention them.

However, when people try to write their stuff, it's just bad. You are not Shakespeare -- so please, God willing, don't say Nay to Thee.

I respect what's come before me. People who respect it so much as to vomit it under their own name carry little, though, and I'm a little angry at this thread.

Elitist Poetry?

Well, no.

Voodoo · 10-23-2007, 08:38 PM

Poetic fascism?

A mistake is not style.

Repeat after me.

No excuses. A mistake is not style.

_

I read about an interview with Cormac McCarthy, and in it were mentioned his editing of older era novels. He's a sparse man in his prose, but he's one of the best of the century.

He pretty much removed all the excess punctuation. Look at Dickens, though; that fellow loved semicolons; it was dated; it was Dickens.

Cormac was removing the style of those works, and that's not right.

However, saying something so common as this mistake (the poet will undoubtedly say they intended this, but we all know)

I hopped off the
corner ship
with a ship on my
shoulder
with
two little
things left for
me.
_

Now, tell me that thing has its own voice. Or, tell me it's been done and pissed on.

Eiji Tunsinagi · 10-23-2007, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by German Voodoo

Poetic fascism?

A mistake is not style.

Repeat after me.

No excuses. A mistake is not style.

_

I read about an interview with Cormac McCarthy, and in it were mentioned his editing of older era novels. He's a sparse man in his prose, but he's one of the best of the century.

He pretty much removed all the excess punctuation. Look at Dickens, though; that fellow loved semicolons; it was dated; it was Dickens.

Cormac was removing the style of those works, and that's not right.

However, saying something so common as this mistake (the poet will undoubtedly say they intended this, but we all know)

I hopped off the
corner ship
with a ship on my
shoulder
with
two little
things left for
me.
_

Now, tell me that thing has its own voice. Or, tell me it's been done and pissed on.

LOL good point.

Baron · 10-23-2007, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by German Voodoo

Poetic fascism?

A mistake is not style.

Repeat after me.

No excuses. A mistake is not style.

_

I read about an interview with Cormac McCarthy, and in it were mentioned his editing of older era novels. He's a sparse man in his prose, but he's one of the best of the century.

He pretty much removed all the excess punctuation. Look at Dickens, though; that fellow loved semicolons; it was dated; it was Dickens.

Cormac was removing the style of those works, and that's not right.

However, saying something so common as this mistake (the poet will undoubtedly say they intended this, but we all know)

I hopped off the
corner ship
with a ship on my
shoulder
with
two little
things left for
me.
_

Now, tell me that thing has its own voice. Or, tell me it's been done and pissed on.

You seem to be of the view that comments here are targetting you. You're wrong. There are others here who apply critique and pour scorn on anything that doesn't fir their own view. The insecure will always try to draw an opponent into an arena where he feels he has the advantage and the superior understanding. There are a few who do that so don't single yourself out.

Voodoo · 10-23-2007, 08:50 PM

I know it's not targeting me. Don't skirt.

Poetic fascism is not someone preferring a style over another. I've seen you go into both rigid and free verse, and it seems you prefer the former.

I'd consult you for rigid verse, but not for free verse. is that discrimination?

Anti-ignorance, actually.

Vodka's right, though. someone who wants to perfect their craft will probably do it long before someone who doesn't care to try.

While poetry Written from the Heart is lovely, it's not too much if it doesn't try to be Verse.

Lots of emotion in that JackMeOff-Emoh poetry, but no form. You and I both despise that shit, but in this, it's quaint and so very opposed to Elitist Poetry.

Baron · 10-23-2007, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by German Voodoo

I know it's not targeting me. Don't skirt.

Poetic fascism is not someone preferring a style over another. I've seen you go into both rigid and free verse, and it seems you prefer the former.

I'd consult you for rigid verse, but not for free verse. is that discrimination?

Anti-ignorance, actually.

Vodka's right, though. someone who wants to perfect their craft will probably do it long before someone who doesn't care to try.

While poetry Written from the Heart is lovely, it's not too much if it doesn't try to be Verse.

Lots of emotion in that JackMeOff-Emoh poetry, but no form. You and I both despise that shit, but in this, it's quaint and so very opposed to Elitist Poetry.

you miss the point. There are people who put certain types of poetry on a pedestal as they do certain works of art and they become an elitist thing because they can only be understood and truly appreciated by the initiate. I do not believe that this is something to strive after because it is just artistic snobbery. That does not mean that I don't think that people should seak to learn, improve, even excel.

A point: I can look at Picasso's "Gernica" (theme the Spanish War) and I can see through his abstraction the emotion that he wanted to convey. There are many abstract painters who have tried to follow the master who produce nothing intelligable at all.