Mirror

Certainly, every poem can be recited but only some contain an aural element, which is pre-fact.

__________________
Where the barmen have their names etched in salt; earthy and honest like their fathers. -- MisterJack

Pete_C

Most poetry is created in a written word format, and that is primarily how it is intended to be digested. However, it can be recited if desired. Although the recitation takes place in what is called spoken word, this is not to be confused with the genre referred to as "Spoken Word".

"Spoken Word" (and I've stuck it in quotes to emphasis I am discussing the genre) can be poetry, prose, lectures, etc.., written expressly for performance. Few poems written as written word format fit the genre of "Spoken Word", even if recited. Much confusion exists over "Spoken Word" because often performers will refer to their performance pieces as poems, no matter whether they are poetry, prose, dialogues, monologues or simple sound-based aural explorations. Indeed, many awards given to performance pieces are poetry awards, although the pieces in question are not poems, and are clearly described as non-poetic by the performers.

What often happens with regard to "Spoken Word" is that traditional poets insist that them reciting their written word format poems qualifies. However, this is as true as someone's written shopping list qualifying as poetry.

Sadly, much of the original growth in the field of "Spoken Word" has been stiffled because those who do not (or do not wish to) understand the genre insist on cluttering it up with recitals of pieces that have few if any aural qualities, and which do not rely on the method of performance to inject an element to the piece.

Another favourite quibble of written word poets is that some people have shit voices and might not be able to do justice to their work. Life sucks; I can't sing, so can we make singing contests only judgable in writing? I can write a song like Frank Sinatra!

Sadly, the typical response has shown its head here. "Spoken Word" is not poetry recital. To say poetry is traditionally oral doesn't count for shit. We're not talking about poetry. It is a shame, because a lot of people will be denied access to an exciting art form. It's a shame that those who don't understand "Spoken Word" can't sit back and discover what it is about instead of simply assuming its what they might want it to be.

This problem isn't solely associated with this forum. Many have "Spoken Word" sections that are little more than people reading poems. However, people here like to think that they are little more creative and open-minded than on other fora. I think that is what makes it annoying that something simple like a "Spoken Word" section cannot be achieved.

On more than one occasion on this forum I have seen bloody good ideas disintegrate because people have views about rules of literature, form and format, technical detail and the rights and wrongs of writing. What they have forgotten is that much of what we regard as classic or exceptional literature (and art) broke all the rules. That's why it stands out.

Ironically, as one of the more creative and free-thinking forums, WF is quick enough to cull any idea that challenges and takes forward the one thing we are all supposed to be passionate about.

Christ on a bike, image in we ever produced something that people liked and enjoyed? We'd have to scourge ourselves for all eternity.

Mirror

Pete: That's what I noted in my previous post, if inarticulately. I certainly make the discernment between 'Spoken Word' (deliberately prepared for oral delivery, thus pre-fact, prior to performance.) and mere recitation. These two genres do not overlap.
Whether or not a piece of work is a poem, lies beyond the point. I, too, am concerned that some will use such a section to advertise their poems.

__________________
Where the barmen have their names etched in salt; earthy and honest like their fathers. -- MisterJack

Baron

The very fact of posting on a forum at all might be regarded as promoting the work. I think that if good ideas fail on this forum then it's because people have to overcomplicate issues and force their own view instead of simply running with the original idea.

__________________

Mirror

Sure, but these poems, regardless of quality, all belong to one distinct genre: Poetry.
Baron, do you specifically intend your poems for oral delivery (does that aural element affect your writing process)? If not, they're written word (whether you then choose to recite them or not.) There would be nothing wrong with a spoken word section, but, as I have read very few poets here who consistently produce aural work, I'm afraid it will be filled with recitations, often performed to simply draw attention to a poem. I'm not saying that would be you - just in principle.

__________________
Where the barmen have their names etched in salt; earthy and honest like their fathers. -- MisterJack

Baron

I always write with the view that poems are meant to be read aloud. I honestly think that many of the debates that develope around ideas come down to straining gnats and swallowing camels. For every idea put forward there are more than enough people prepared to hiinder it.

If this is down to simply having a section with written poems that have links to sound files. As already stated, people can do that now, as you have. It seems to work well, without this type of debate, on other forums such as Literary Mary.

As for promotion, it's part and parcel of wanting to be a published writer as everyone who takes there work seriously on this forum wants to be. If people do not want to promote their work in any way then they should not be posting here at all.

I can remember hawking my first novel around every publishing house and agent in London before, after wearing out a lot of show leather, I got a reputable agent to take me into his stable. There was no internet then. At present I am involved in a venture allowing a group of writers and artists to form their own publishing company, using a POD service for printing and distribution. Without the internet this would not have been possible because the cost involved would have been too daunting. I'm not doinng any hard sell on this but neither am I keeping quiet about it, although it seems to be something with which at least one person has taken exception.

The forums are here to workshop, share and to promote by people who seek publication and there are many threads in the various forums that suppoprt this view.

__________________

Mirror

Personally, nothing against such a section in the forum. Just trying to discern between spoken and written word. Aural poetry strives to impart a message, which exceeds many of the written word elements in favor of creating an impact through speech. I recorded Optimism Fetish, for I intended (when the poem was still in its infancy - ergo) it to be spoken word. I would not do the same with my other poems. Recitation is a different matter. As for the appeal to tradition, prose was read out loud, as well. I feel (in my meager opinion) that it would be best to leave spoken word at the author's discretion. If he or she produces spoken word and wishes to execute it, let him or her do so by including a sound file with the poem. I read your post at Bard Bistro - as far as poetry challenges go, recitation is in order, just as it may be done in a poetry reading. Ultimately, it would be up to the administrators to decide.

__________________
Where the barmen have their names etched in salt; earthy and honest like their fathers. -- MisterJack

Ilasir Maroa

Okay... I'm trying to undertsand this. I do get that "Spoken Word" as a genre is a different than poetry. I know how slam poetry sounds. On the other hand, I have trouble undertsanding what exactly is the difference between a "Spoken Word" poem and a written poem. I always write pieces to be read aloud. The whole point of rhythm and structure as techniques seems to me to be a way to show how the poem is supposed to be read. I often write (though post few) things not in "poem" format because the point is to give something a feeling that normal prose does not have, but still to not be a poem in the conventional sense. I do not write things to be puprposefully in the "Spoken Word" genre, but does that necessarily mean that it couldn't be? You have a ghost of a definition, but even with google, I can't seem to find a concrete explanation of what does and does not constitute "Spoken Word".

__________________
My hopeful book:
Crap! Haven't posted it anywhere yet, darn!
"Only tyranny cloaks itself in shadows. The light of justice can not be hidden."

www.theoddvillepress.com

Mirror

Ilasir, by your argument, why should one not read his or her short story out loud?
I understand what you mean about rhythm and cadence, but a well-written prose needs to flow, as well. All sound devices in a poem indicate how a poem should be received and consumed (often, they are tied to the poem's content - see MisterJack's latest poems).
In the poetry forum, I only know of Edgewise who consistently produces spoken word. I have only attempted one such piece. Spoken word encompasses poetry but is by no means limited to it.

__________________
Where the barmen have their names etched in salt; earthy and honest like their fathers. -- MisterJack

Baron

In a way you're introducing another argument here because there is much that is posted in the poetry forum that is effectively just prose broken into stanzas and posted as poetry.

nonetheless, I believe that a forum for voice recordings should have no more restrictions placed on it than the current poetry forum. On issue which hasn't been mentioned yet would be the work that admin would have to do to police the forum if tight restrictions are placed on it.

I think it is also not helpful to be too narrow in the definition of what may be regarded as fitting. Much of the structure of modern poetry, far from being gimmicky as some have suggested, is in fact a form of stage direction for reading aloud, with line breaks and spaces being used to inform the speaker.

Below is a definition of spoken word poetry from Wikepedia:

This is pretty comprehensive and includes recitals. To put a narrow definition on this would be to create a situation that has already been argued against, to not only rule out recordings deemed as recitation but to inhibit those that may be classified as experimental.

__________________

The Backward OX

Can someone help me here?

Where is the 'Speak' key?

__________________
How Beautiful it is to Do Nothing, and then Rest Afterwards . . . . . Spanish proverb

Ilasir Maroa

I'm not arguing at all. I'm trying to get a coherent and comprehensive understanding of spoken word as a genre seperate from poetry. Certainly, Edgewise has a stle much different from mine, or most of the other poets on this forum, and it certainly fits under what I have always considered to be spoken word, but on the other hand, I am unsure as to what exact qualities make it spoken word. Which parts could be dropped and still have it be spoken word, and which parts could not? I've always thought of Edge as having a differetn style, but is that style the only thing that can fit under spoken word, or are there other styles that still remain within the genre?

__________________
My hopeful book:
Crap! Haven't posted it anywhere yet, darn!
"Only tyranny cloaks itself in shadows. The light of justice can not be hidden."

www.theoddvillepress.com

The Backward OX

Check this out (Post #1)
http://www.writingforums.com/publish...casey-bat.html

__________________
How Beautiful it is to Do Nothing, and then Rest Afterwards . . . . . Spanish proverb

Pete_C

"Seems" being the important word. You tell me where you want to discuss the issue, or stop mentioning it in ways that allows you to use idiotic smilies to insinuate that my opinion of your self-promotion is somehow petty.

I'll copy this note to other threads where you've skated over the topic. Then the ball is in your court.

Mike C

I think people are getting too bogged down in the definition of what should be spoken, and what should be read. It's an irrelevancy, really; any poem or prose work should work in either medium. If your work has to be performed to be fully appreciated, there's probably something wrong with it, and if it won't stand up to the read-out-loud test, then likewise.

I'm not au fait with the technicalities of this site, but I'm guessing that a high bandwidth demand cause by a lot of people accessing streaming audio won't be great, and will cause greater inconvenience for a greater number of people than just those who want to post sound.

There is nothing stopping anyone recording themselves reading, getting it hosted elsewhere, and posting a link. Like this: Home

Please, listen, but don't distribute. These are readings from pro-writers' works and I don't want to piss them off by messing with their copyright. And note - these were all recorded by a professional reader in a studio. If you want to do your own work some justice, spend some time on it. Download audacity or similar, and get a good quality microphone. The one built into your computer, or the one you use for skype, just isn't good enough.

My other thought is that readings are, as far as this forum is concerned, just ephemera. What we strive for here is using the right words, in the right order, spelled and punctuated correctly. That's something you can only do with a written text. If you want to test your work on people's ears, go to a slam, read to your friends, stand on street corners, shout from the rooftops. Our business here is words, not delivery.

__________________
My writing
Photography
Web design for Writers
The Oddville Press