Fool's Rools of Poetry

[jomar]

Good stuff. Thanks.

 

[maggot420]

Wow. I hadn't realized I broke so many rools.
And they are insightful rools by an incredibly insightful poet.
If I were of a sensible disposition, I'd be ashamed.

 

[The_Fool]

and after a hiatus...

At the prompting of a fellow writer.


Audience.

Always consider your audience. Word selection. Topic selection. Craft your work to suit the group that you want to read the work. A treatise that dwells on knowing the ins and outs of an inner city and its slang will have a limited audience. If you are seeking an audience that thrives on hardcore BDSM, then you are going to drive that work to specifics that may or may not appeal to a broader audience.

Counterpoint: Writing about a love relationship is generic. Writing about lesbian or gay relationships is more specific. Becoming more specific in your topic can reduce your audience. By broadening your topic, you may broaden your appeal. The key here is determining what your topic is. If your topic is about a specific relationship or specifically about same-sex relationships, then you must remain true to your topic. This is an example that can be applied to various topics, not just the love relationship that I specified in this example.

Second Counterpoint: There is a school of thought that says the writer writes the work to communicate himself. It is up to the reader to research the topic and become educated enough to understand what is said. I disagree, but I lost my All-Knowing hat.

 

[champagne1982]

Form or Formal Poetry

Form Poetry is poetry written to very specific rules. The most well known is probably the Sonnet. No, I am not going to get into the specific rules of any form poetry in this post. I may include those in other posts later, but that is yet to be determined.

Love it or hate it, Form Poetry is definitely a type of poetry. Some poets feel restrained by the limitations place up on them, depending upon the type of form. Therefore they never consider writing form poetry.

I recommend attempting forms. This is another way of exercising your skills as a writer. Just another challenge. What it does is it influences word selection; focuses the writer on the sound of the words and how they are accented; and it sets specific limits on how long or short a poem is required to be.

You don’t have to consider a form poem to be something that you want to show your audience, just consider it to be a conditioning exercise for building your poetic muscles.

And no Ange, I am not going to write a friggin’ Sestina about poet rules…

Darling, it's not formal it's formula. I completely concur that most established formulae are exercises which, when done as well as can be, can produce something as marvellous and toned as a flexed latissimus on a tanned back. < sigh >

Read me this from your smiling lips
Open my mind with tasty
Oratory twisted around your tongue
Lick the print from the page.

 

[neonlyte]

and after a hiatus...

Second Counterpoint: There is a school of thought that says the writer writes the work to communicate himself. It is up to the reader to research the topic and become educated enough to understand what is said. I disagree, but I lost my All-Knowing hat.

Thanks for resurrecting this thread.

I know a lot of artists (fine art) who follow this rool almost as if it were an edict. I'm not wholly comfortable with the approach, being of a lesser mind. It took the SO some years to educate me.

 

[The_Fool]

May the source be with you...

Had a foster daughter that assumed that if she heard something that was stated with complete conviction, then it must be true. Approaching this from a different angle, heard a conversation where someone had read something on the Internet, so it must be true. There is no incorrect information on the Internet, is there? Like I told my daughter, you have to consider the credibility of the source.

There are two sources of factual information available to the writer. The first is him or herself. The second is everybody else. Just because I want to, call the first source a primary source. Call the second source, a secondary source. If a writer is keying on being as true to the facts as possible, then the best source of information is always going to be what is gained through the writers own five senses. More on this in a minute.

Secondary sources of information are providing information that has been interpreted. It may be accurate, it may not. It is biased by the source. It is no longer completely objective. What you have is an interpretation of information, rather than the information itself. How has the information been changed? It may be incomplete, it may be biased. How many have seen the left-brain/right-brain picture? Here is one such example. This type of interpretation of observation is based on which hemisphere of the brain is dominate. But other filters include culture, race, life experience, sex, etc.

How spicy is the food? The writer tastes the food and immediately knows whether the food is spicy or not. Another person reporting to the writer is interpreting the spiciness of the food based on their experience. But wait a minute. If the secondary source is interpreting the information, why can’t the writer be interpreting the information as well?

They are. So the writer falls into the fallacy that they are the best and only source of information available. But wait, I said that the primary source is the best source of information. I just proved myself wrong, didn’t I?

Yes and no. The writer needs to understand that all sources are biased. All sources interpret the results. The writer needs to be cognizant of the fact that the one that lies the most to the reader may be the writer himself.

 

[The_Fool]

Word has an annoying habit of capitalizing the beginning word of each line. In a certain age, that played well with how poetry was presented. Today, the norm in poetry is to capitalize based on the punctuation. Of course this gets really confusing if the writer elects not to use punctuation. Then, I suppose, the capitalization can be a clue to the reader as to where the capitalization should be. For me, I typically channel e.e. cummings if I am not going to use punctuation and don’t capitalize anything except for proper names. Whatever method you use, stay consistent.

 

[The_Fool]

A hitchhiker may need his towel, but a writer needs his dictionary. Not to mention all the other references one might need to write. But if a writer has his dictionary, then the people around him are more likely to relax and assume that he knows what he is talking about.

 

[MagicaPractica]

A hitchhiker may need his towel, but a writer needs his dictionary. Not to mention all the other references one might need to write. But if a writer has his dictionary, then the people around him are more likely to relax and assume that he knows what he is talking about.

 

[The_Fool]

So there have been a couple of threads lately that have really set my teeth on edge. I’m not talking about the political, racial, misanthropic or misogynist threads. I’m talking about the ones that seek to explain good writing, good poetry.

Fuck good.

“Good” is one of those words that is essentially meaningless. Along with its moronic twin “Bad.” Descriptors “Good” and “Bad” are so nebulous as to almost have no meaning. Almost. For me, they have no place in criticism and little use in writing as they paint so little of the landscape.

Weak words lead to muddled writing. Muddled writing leads to lost, listless, disengaged readers. If there are readers at all.

There are other words and phrases that add fiber, but little meaning to writing. As readers, we are surrounded by them every day. Just remember, we are trying to let our writing unfold, not shit it out.

 

[Tricialen]

So there have been a couple of threads lately that have really set my teeth on edge. I’m not talking about the political, racial, misanthropic or misogynist threads. I’m talking about the ones that seek to explain good writing, good poetry.

Fuck good.

“Good” is one of those words that is essentially meaningless. Along with its moronic twin “Bad.” Descriptors “Good” and “Bad” are so nebulous as to almost have no meaning. Almost. For me, they have no place in criticism and little use in writing as they paint so little of the landscape.

Weak words lead to muddled writing. Muddled writing leads to lost, listless, disengaged readers. If there are readers at all.

There are other words and phrases that add fiber, but little meaning to writing. As readers, we are surrounded by them every day. Just remember, we are trying to let our writing unfold, not shit it out.

Oh stop being such a fuddy duddy...and kiss me I do it really 'good'

 

[The_Fool]

Oh stop being such a fuddy duddy...and kiss me I do it really 'good'

Darling, your kisses inspire epics...

 

[Stella_Omega]

Less is More.

After you craft the draft of your lastest blurt, sit back and take a look at it for anything extra. Anything that does not add to the story. Then take a very sharp knife it cut it out. Poetry is spare. Poetry is condensed. It is the fine cognac distilled from wine.


Example:

The glorious day ended gracefully
as the incandescent sun
faded from the sky
yielding its bright yellow light
to shades of scarlet, orange and pink.
Then encroaching twilight
leeches color from the sky
and leaves a shading of gray


Day ends gracefully.
Incandescent sun fades.
Bright yellow yields
to scarlet, orange, pink.
Encroaching twilight
leeches colors gray.

Inspiration, my Fool!

Today's eve was made of grace
The sun's harsh flare at last shaded
by the kindly West,
who graced us lavishly with her gold
until all of it was spent into gray
except for the band on your finger.

 

[The_Fool]

Inspiration, my Fool!

Today's eve was made of grace
The sun's harsh flare at last shaded
by the kindly West,
who graced us lavishly with her gold
until all of it was spent into gray
except for the band on your finger.

I like that twist with the band. Telling a story and not telling a story. Is it a spouse, friends that regret a marriage, widow or widower? Which direction do I, as reader, want to take it?

 

[Stella_Omega]

I like that twist with the band. Telling a story and not telling a story. Is it a spouse, friends that regret a marriage, widow or widower? Which direction do I, as reader, want to take it?

Today's eve was made of grace
The sun's harsh flare at last shaded
by the kindly West,
who graced us lavishly with her gold
until all of it was spent into gray
except for the band, my darling,
on your finger.

or;

Today's eve was made of grace
The sun's harsh flare at last shaded
by the kindly West,
who graced us lavishly with her gold
until all of it was spent into gray
except for the band you had forgotten,
on your finger.

 

[The_Fool]

Today's eve was made of grace
The sun's harsh flare at last shaded
by the kindly West,
who graced us lavishly with her gold
until all of it was spent into gray
except for the band, my darling,
on your finger.

or;

Today's eve was made of grace
The sun's harsh flare at last shaded
by the kindly West,
who graced us lavishly with her gold
until all of it was spent into gray
except for the band you had forgotten,
on your finger.

or binding band///upon your finger

or to be totally innocuous:

except for the band///wrapped around your finger

 

[Stella_Omega]

Today's eve was made of grace
The sun's harsh flare at last shaded
by the kindly West,
who graced us lavishly with her gold
until all of it was spent into gray
except for the band that graced
your finger.

 

[WRJames]

Kenneth Koch once told me that a poem needs to read well as natural speech (I must admit I don't remember his exact words almost forty-five years later but that was the gist of it).

His point was that just arranging words awkwardly or leaving some out or getting them to rhyme doesn't make something a poem.

Personally, I prefer poetry that has the traditional elements of rhyme and meter, but I have always since taken "Mr. Cock's" advice into account

 

[The_Fool]

Kenneth Koch once told me that a poem needs to read well as natural speech (I must admit I don't remember his exact words almost forty-five years later but that was the gist of it).

His point was that just arranging words awkwardly or leaving some out or getting them to rhyme doesn't make something a poem.

Personally, I prefer poetry that has the traditional elements of rhyme and meter, but I have always since taken "Mr. Cock's" advice into account

When I feel like being an asshole, I say, "There is no such thing as poetry." Surely if something exists, it can be defined and I have yet to find a single definition that fits all those works that I would consider poetic.

 

[lisa123414]

`````

 

[WRJames]

When I feel like being an asshole, I say, "There is no such thing as poetry." Surely if something exists, it can be defined and I have yet to find a single definition that fits all those works that I would consider poetic.

I'm sure that, like beauty, poetry is in the eye (ear?) of the beholder. But, personally, I don't think that arranging words on a page in a special way turns them into a poem -- a test is to read them aloud and see what you think of them that way. But of course that is mere a personal opinion.

Quite often when I have been driving back from skiing this winter the radio has had a little literary moment on, Garrison Keillor's Writier's Almanac, and sometimes he reads a poem, or a supposed poem. Last month he was reading this one (remember I was just listening to it, not looking at it written down). I remember thinking it was an interesting story, but not a poem. Any opinions?

 

[The_Fool]

I'm sure that, like beauty, poetry is in the eye (ear?) of the beholder. But, personally, I don't think that arranging words on a page in a special way turns them into a poem -- a test is to read them aloud and see what you think of them that way. But of course that is mere a personal opinion.

Quite often when I have been driving back from skiing this winter the radio has had a little literary moment on, Garrison Keillor's Writier's Almanac, and sometimes he reads a poem, or a supposed poem. Last month he was reading this one (remember I was just listening to it, not looking at it written down). I remember thinking it was an interesting story, but not a poem. Any opinions?

I read that kind of poetry all the time. Is it? If she says so, I'm not going to argue with it. Would I write it? No. What makes it poetry is the line "I bought two down pillows for us all." Everything else is just furniture to set the stage. I prefer to be a little more obscure. She is trying to bring detail in to make it more familiar, but to me is more about her. I don't necessarily want the real "me" in there, at least not most of the time.

Poetry should sound good when read, but sometimes is written such that the eyes deceive and change the meaning. This is where white space, line breaks and stanzas come in. Sometimes I plant landmines that offer divergent meanings depending on whether the white space is observed or ignored.

 

[WRJames]

Sometimes I plant landmines that offer divergent meanings depending on whether the white space is observed or ignored.

I like to do that with words that sound similar or the same, and can both be used in the same place. It gives a shimmering effect, especially when read aloud (or sung) so that the listener isn't sure which of the words is intended.

 

[lisa123414]

yes, fuck good
is it something i can sing?

 

[WRJames]

yes, fuck good
is it something i can sing?

Maybe I should work up the nerve to put up some songs along with the piano music.