Content

[SpiceCake]

Some people get so wrapped up in punctuation when it comes to peotry and I get really pissy about this. What about content; the message? Are some people so damn anal that they miss the message of some artful and beautiful?

When I write poetry, punctuation, or lack thereof, is deliberate.

Discuss......

 

[Rybka]

"Peotry"

Some people get so wrapped up in punctuation when it comes to peotry and I get really pissy about this. What about content; the message? Are some people so damn anal that they miss the message of some artful and beautiful?

When I write poetry, punctuation, or lack thereof, is deliberate.

Discuss......

What about typos?

 

[The_Fool]

Anyone got any ice?

Oh Shit....

*Slams head on the table barely missing the laptop*

This is another "What is Poetry" discussion. Your choice to use punctuation or not is very much a personal choice that I would never seek to argue with.

The concept of punctuation is to give the reader clues on how to read the poem. How the thoughts break. How words flow, especially when spoken aloud. But what if you want the reader to develop his own concept of how the poem should flow? What if the poem is never meant to be spoken aloud? Take them out, if you so please.

Various poets here and elsewhere look at poetry in almost as many ways as there are poets. Some are more classical and have specific rules while others are more avant-garde and eschew such limiting rules. Same with rhyming. Same with meter.

My personal style is to use punctuation, MOST of the time. I don’t follow the same rules I would if writing prose. I use punctuation to provide the soft and hard stops where I wish the reader to pause, to break up the words into distinct phrases, to signal to the reader that a thought may be composed of multiple lines and finally, because I intend my poems to be capable of being spoken rather than just read. I do include rhyming, sometimes. I do include meter, although sometimes I wonder if I am the only one that hears it. My personal style is whatever the hell is bouncing around in my head on that particular day.

Back to your original comment. If someone doesn’t like the way you punctuate or don’t and you don’t care for their method of criticism. Tell them to kiss your ass. Preferably politely. Most of the time critics here are simply looking to help the writer achieve a more readable product, and generally do a good job. However when editing, the worst thing an editor can do is impose his or her own style. Occasionally there are critics that fail to recognize that God did not provide them with the final draft for how poetry or prose should be written. Please refer to my original recommendation for such occasions.

I know that I am not the be-all end-all of poetry. But I like what I do. I like what I write. If you ask me my opinion, specifically, I will tell you what I think. I will also tell you that my opinion and $3 will get you a Latte at Starbucks. But I will be honest and I will tell you what I like, and/or don’t.

Damn this post is too long. Where’s the scotch bottle.

Fool

 

[SpiceCake]

Re: "Peotry"

What about typos?

What about them?

 

[Angeline]

The fool shows his lack of foolishness (once again ) by giving some excellent advice, with which I concur. The choice to use punctuation in a poem is a personal one, and it has more to do with a poet's writing style or the purpose of a particular poem than any set of rules.

If I write a poem in which I want the reader to stop at certain points, pause, and focus on specific words, I use punctuation (as well as format, of course). Some of my poems though are more fluid--full of intentional wordplay that can be interpreted in various ways. In these, punctuation would stand in the way of my content, and therefore I do not impose a single interpretation by adding commas and such.

Rybka's point is well taken, too, though. Every day I read the new poems posted here, and many of them have typos or grammatical errors that make moot the comparatively sophisticated issue of whether punctuation enhances a particular poem.

 

[darkmaas]

The-Fool said:

Damn this post is too long. Where’s the scotch bottle.

I know it's early, but make mine a double.

Angeline said:

...make moot the comparatively sophisticated issue...

I realize that this is literotica, but isn't it a bit early for making moot.


darkmaas

 

[Angeline]

I realize that this is literotica, but isn't it a bit early for making moot.

It's like jello, baby. There's always room.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Re: Re: "Peotry"

What about them?

I think that what the Fish is trying to say is that, while the deliberate use or lack of punctuation in a poem is always subject to its content, tone and style -- and I don't think I ever came across anyone who would object to this, so I have no idea of which some people you're talking about, but maybe I'm lucky -- more than a fair share of typos and other unintentional abnormalities aren't. They show, in my opinion, disrespect for the language and for the readers, and if the poets don't respect their readers, the readers can't be expected to have much respect for their poetry. Therefore, fuck the content.

That's just me, though...

 

[Rybka]

Re: Re: Re: "Peotry"

I think that what the Fish is trying to say is that, while the deliberate use or lack of punctuation in a poem is always subject to its content, tone and style -- and I don't think I ever came across anyone who would object to this, so I have no idea of which some people you're talking about, but maybe I'm lucky -- more that a fair share of typos and other unintentional abnormalities aren't. They show, in my opinion, disrespect for the language and for the readers, and if the poets don't respect their readers, the readers can't be expected to have much respect for their poetry. Therefore, fuck the content.

That's just me, though...

What she said!
And SpiceCake, I was also poking fun at the misspelling in your post.

Regards, Rybka

 

[perks]

If only you know how the poem is supposed to flow(ie. punctuation or lack thereof) Why do you share it with everyone else? If you are your own audience, the punctuation doesn't matter. If you're writing to communicate thought or emotion or imagery, punctuation is important so those things aren't muddied or lost for a basic language rule.

I find if you write in certain forms, with plenty of structure, you can give or take the punctuation because the structure is showing your audience the flow of the poem anyway.

Poetry without structure, be it meter, rhyme or punctuation, is just vocabulary swimming around unmastered.

Punctuation is just another tool; without tools a poem can never be built.

 

[WickedEve]

Hello, ducklet. Like your response about punctuation being another tool that can be effectively used.
spicecake, of course, content is important. What bothers me as a reader is to find a poem with good content and be put off by lack of punctuation in places that are confusing. Put as much effort into grammar, punctuation, etc, as you do the content and message, and you'll have a better poem.

 

[Angeline]

If only you know how the poem is supposed to flow(ie. punctuation or lack thereof) Why do you share it with everyone else? If you are your own audience, the punctuation doesn't matter. If you're writing to communicate thought or emotion or imagery, punctuation is important so those things aren't muddied or lost for a basic language rule.

I find if you write in certain forms, with plenty of structure, you can give or take the punctuation because the structure is showing your audience the flow of the poem anyway.

Poetry without structure, be it meter, rhyme or punctuation, is just vocabulary swimming around unmastered.

Punctuation is just another tool; without tools a poem can never be built.

In general I absolutely agree with you, but poetry is an art--and as Charlie Parker said "there are no boundaries in art." Not everyone paints like Van Gogh or writes like Emily Dickenson--there are many ways to go at it, and they don't all require punctuation, IMHO. The point is to make a conscious decision to use a format or system that fits your art and use it consistently. That is to say--edit, don't be haphazard. Even an apparently unformatted, unpunctuated piece (e.g., James Joyce's prose) can be the result of considerable planning and construction.

And of course no one can ensure that any plan will lead to the interpretation(s) a writer anticipates, but planning is, I think, a good thing.

 

[OT]

To sum what most above have said as pithily as possible:
Write what you write on purpose.

Now for the long winded response to help beat the topic senseless:

When someone picks on your punctuation it is no different than suggesting a different format or a different word. Although a reader left wanting will often latch on to easy or obvious alternatives, the message to the writer is always the same: At least for this audience of one -- the writing failed (or was less than perfect).

It's up to the writer to decide what (if anything) to do about it. Poetry differs from prose in that it must not only communicate effectively, it must convey the message pleasantly, artistically, um... poetically.

 

[perks]

In general I absolutely agree with you, but poetry is an art--and as Charlie Parker said "there are no boundaries in art." Not everyone paints like Van Gogh or writes like Emily Dickenson--there are many ways to go at it, and they don't all require punctuation, IMHO. The point is to make a conscious decision to use a format or system that fits your art and use it consistently. That is to say--edit, don't be haphazard. Even an apparently unformatted, unpunctuated piece (e.g., James Joyce's prose) can be the result of considerable planning and construction.

And of course no one can ensure that any plan will lead to the interpretation(s) a writer anticipates, but planning is, I think, a good thing. [/B]

I don't think we aren't agreeing here.

I don't believe every poem requires punctuation. I do believe you should know how to use the tools and then choose whether or not you want/need to use them, as I'm sure Joyce did. I don't think you can make an educated decision about using or not using punctuation in poetry if you have no idea how to use the tool in the first place.

 

[perks]

At least for this audience of one -- the writing failed (or was less than perfect).

I think this is too trite. Editing doesn't mean a poem failed or that "this poem sucks it wasn't successful". It means it is a continuous work of art that is bigger than the artist's perspective when it comes into the scope of other viewers' skill and experience.

 

[Angeline]

I don't think you can make an educated decision about using or not using punctuation in poetry if you have no idea how to use the tool in the first place.

Well amen to that--and I didn't think we were disagreeing either. I just wanted to expand on what you said to clarify a point I made in my earlier post because I think it's one people tend to miss. I find I pretty much agree with all I see you say here.

And I see OT's point, which I took to mean "failed" for a reader, although I also think that every poem fails for some readers, which may or may not have something to do with how well written it is.

 

[perks]

And I see OT's point, which I took to mean "failed" for a reader, although I also think that every poem fails for some readers, which may or may not have something to do with how well written it is. [/B]

Too true, however... I know some people and I'm not mentioning any names DRAKE DRAKE!!! who think it is pefectly acceptable to edit the classics... bites my butt, I'll tell you what. <grin> And I Knoooooooooow those poems haven't failed, but everything is editable<is this even a word?>

 

[Angeline]

Too true, however... I know some people and I'm not mentioning any names DRAKE DRAKE!!! who think it is pefectly acceptable to edit the classics... bites my butt, I'll tell you what. <grin> And I Knoooooooooow those poems haven't failed, but everything is editable<is this even a word?>

I hear you. If he ever moves to NJ, I know a place that would love to hire him, lol.

 

[OT]

"failed" might have sounded trite but I was not assigning blame or merit -- I was only giving name to the chasm that exists between what the writer meant and what the reader understood/appreciated.

Whenever there is less than perfect communication there is usually room for improvement on both sides.

No matter how perfect the poem, there will always be a reader who doesn't like (or understand) it. You cannot argue with a reader's opinion. It is what it is.

A writer who wants to improve only needs to understand the feedback -- not agree with it.

 

[perks]

A writer who wants to improve only needs to understand the feedback -- not agree with it.

*nods*

This is right on the target, cookie.

 

[destinie21]

Is this horse dead yet or are we still beating it?

Or maybe it's dead and we're beating it anyway

 

[ruminator]

Is this horse dead yet or are we still beating it?

Or maybe it's dead and we're beating it anyway

I think it's still twitching. That could be the haunting memory of the words I've heard from my young ones when they've said "Spelling doesn't count, they don't take points off for spelling"

"Aaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrggggggghh"