creating new images

[daughter]

Poets--

I hear a lot of poets defending cliches. I argue for fresh imagery. The problem with using images and terms that are common is that they yield no impact. To me a cliche is like watching a commercial for the news. You stop paying attention. You go grab a soda and hope you're program is back on when you return. The last thing I want is for reader to tune me out because I'm saying the same old thing.

Writers are readers, yes? If you read a lot, it doesn't take long to recognize things that have been done a thousand times.

Why do we rely so heavily on stars, oceans, ecstacy, passion, soul? A single usage here or there is fine. When there's a string of these terms, it's repetition.

Are we not reading and therefore, these are new to us or do we like the same cheese burger prepared the same way everytime?

I really want to know why there isn't more variety in themes, images and vocabularies. It's as if our vocabularies are limited to 1000 words. And by the way, I like the common words, it's the common usage that concerns me.

Very interested in your thoughts.

Peace,

daughter

 

[WickedEve]

Before I came to lit my poetry was stuck on one level. I didn't know I could write better poetry, and I certainly didn't know how. I didn't know words like burning, desire, and passion had been used a million times over in poetry, and that flower as a metaphor for vagina had been done to death. lol
I started reading more, and that's when I began to notice clichés. The more I read the more I realized that so many poems sounded alike. After awhile, I stopped reading poems where the first stanza had 3rd degree passion-burns! Though, I have read some very good poetry that used desire and passion, but the poem was original enough that it didn't seem to hurt it.
I think in many cases, poets use the same old words and phrases because they don't know any better.
The solution: Read more poetry!!!

 

[daughter]

I agree

WE---

I hear you. SA can use passion and heart in ways that nobody is going to feel cold about. lol But, that's because his style employs more than words that we're accustomed to. It's how he uses it.

Read more and you do realize how common and ineffective some words can be when done in the same old way.

I have had the privilege of witnessing the evolution of your work, Eve. It has been inspiring.

The more we read, the more words we acquire to use in new ways for our own work, and we learn new approaches to familiar topics.

When I read a Wicked Eve poem, I recognize your style and not some generic voice that I'll forget as soon as I move on to the next read.

Thanks for adding to the discussion.

Peace,

daughter

 

[REDWAVE]

More than words

It's not just words-- most people, even most poets, don't have original ideas or a fresh, authentic way of looking at the world. That's why their poems all come out sounding pretty much the same: they all think pretty much the same. Most people have had their opinions formed for them by societal conditioning, from their parents, school, the media, their bosses, etc. Very few people actually independently form their own opinions and become truly self-actualized individuals. Most are trapped within the confines of bourgeois conventionality, their thoughts merely the recycled product of the corporate propaganda machine, with its many thousands of different manifestations.

Phwew! Like Alf says, "I slay me!"

 

[daughter]

Sheeze, RED

Talk about dampening the mood. Folks can stop complaining about my dry ass behind that. lol

So when are you going to send me some original material to feature? Haven't seen a submission from you yet.

Peace,

daughter

 

[REDWAVE]

Dry?

Actually, daughter, I've always thought your ass was juicy and succulent, especially when smeared with cocoa butter, not dry at all-- lol.


Huh-- submission? feature? You're talking about your site, I take it. I've posted some stuff there-- what are you saying, that it's derivative and unoriginal? Please clarify.

 

[daughter]

Child, stop

RED--

Are you trying to get me in trouble with the s/o? LOL

We've had a few submission calls and you haven't sent girlfriend any work. I'd like to see "Wiggling Nina". We do draw from regular postings but more from what members send to our mailbox. So get your ass in gear.

Thanks for being there. You're a great member and my friend so I'm always pleased when you're there.

Peace,

daughter

 

[Smaugfire]

I personally can't write something that resembles anything remotely generic in terms of imagery and ideas. If I can't find the words or the terms to describe what I want to say, I'll go back and do it again. I'll dig through a dictionary for hours on end to find the right phrases to craft. Even then I'm not always too happy with my stuff, but I take pride in the effort I give for all things, poetry and prose.

Why do some people write the same cliche over and over again? Because those people are writing half assedly. They aren't trying to improve anything, and they most certainly aren't writing for themselves. What I do is theraputic for me. It makes me a better person, and allows me to reason why I feel the way I do. Perhaps it is a measure of emotion and how connected you are to poetry as a way to vent, or express what you otherwise could not.

 

[karmadog]

I am mainly a reader of poetry. I read enough to know that I have no idea what the hell I'm doing. I'm working on it. One day, I hope to be a bad poet who knows just how bad he sucks.

I have to admit that I have no skills as far as structure goes. I'm pretty much working blind. I also don't have much understanding of rhythm. I feel so out of my depth at Lotus, daughter.

On the other hand, I don't think my imagery is stale. It might be though. Maybe I just haven't read enough poetry to know.

How do you know if it's fresh, or if you just haven't read enough?

 

[daughter]

how do you know

karma--

As a reader and a writer I know, you read more than many wannabes. Better reader a writer is, the more the discriminate he is.

A good test: ask yourself if the term or phrase is something you associate with someone else's work or a common phrase despite knowing its source. If the answer is yes, find another way or support it with enough original text that a reader will forgive you for borrowing.

Many novice writers fail to recognize hackneyed terms because they aren't readers.

Some will call me a snob or anal about the matter. I think I'm simply serious about the craft and I respect those who are committed to honing their skills.

Mediocrity seems be the norm in our culture. I doubt two hundred years from now if we'll be known for contributing any great works to literature. We'll be known for advocating lowering the bar and arguing that we should just write 'how we feel'. ARG!!!

Peace,

daughter

 

[karmadog]

Great Lit

I don't think the problem is that no one is writing great literature, I think the problem is that too few people can recognize it.

Our education system does a poor job of teaching people the liberal arts. I've heard people argue that because Dickens was the most popular author of his day, that Steven King will be remembered in the same way. They forget, I think, that there was no television or radio in Dickens' day. The result was that a greater percentage of the literate actually read regularly. By so doing, they learned greater descrimination skills.

This shouldn't be taken as a slam against King. Just that he's not in the same class with the greats.

How many people actually read poetry today that didn't come on a birthday card?

 

[KatPurrs]

Former Queen of Cliche here...lol

daughter,

It takes time and a lot of reading and workshops to grab the ogre of cliche by the throat, rip it off your shoulder, and throw it in the ole shit can! Cliche and rhyme. Boy have I done it all! And probably continue to but the times are fewer and further between, I hope. I have Lit and Lotus to thank for that. The feedback has been phenomenal. You, UP, Risia and KM, WE and Judo to name a few... And where in the hell is Whisper? Geez I miss her!

Back on topic...I think a lot of the reason behind the lack of fresh vocabulary usage is laziness. Let's face it tv has ruined us. The internet has taken it's toll as well. Most people don't read. Period. Want to express yourself? Just hit the magic because saying:

My one dimensional yet protruding orbs
stare back at you
with ruby party whistle below
I reach out
catch your fly,
roll it into my mouth.
I"m green for want of more

takes waaaaay too much time! er...I need another workshop! LOL

Kat~

 

[daughter]

I agree

karma and Katpurrs--

I agree. We're not reading and liberal arts has been tossed to the side.

I struggle with too much internet. When I do sit down to read, it is always a pleasure. There is something to be said for the feel and quality of a good book.

Karma, that's one of the reasons why I'm here less. I'm trying to get in more reading. And until I thought I wanted to be a poet, you're right, most of it was in greeting cards. LOL

I've had some great mentors who told me like I share with others, you gotta read. And do it offline. Yes, there's some good stuff online, but it's like rap: what you have to wade through to get to the good stuff is overwhelming. I say this as one who is admittedly ignorant of this genre of music.

Every good poet I know online is a reader. They actually buy books, study and write regularly.

Peace,

daughter

 

[TheDR4KE]

Hi Daughter

In Zen one of the underlying principles is to not act from habits but originally every day, every moment. You do this by focusing your awareness on the now, and on whatever it is you are interacting with. You focus on this so that you are one for that time.

We are surrounded by stars, oceans, trees. For many people the cliches are from nature. They are simply the way in which they see how the world interacts with them. To build on this, sometimes can be to overwork.

But on the other hand, if we write without thought of the NOW, but by putting together only strings of words that come from our memory, in habit as it were, then the bad cliches hit.

The trick is to recognise the difference between someone seeing something for the first time, in a similar way to how others saw it, and expressing that ... and ... someone seeing something that others had written about already, being reminded of that and using those phrases in their own writing, even if subconsciously.

I wonder whether some cliches are called such because we read so much, and I wonder how much the need for originality stifles writers...

Blessings,

The Drake

 

[karmadog]

Carification?

Drake, what do you mean by "the need for originality stifles writers"?

In prose, particularly genre fiction, originality CAN be a drawback. Too much originality confuses the unsophisticated reader.

On the other hand, "literary" fiction (please don't razz me on the terms, you know what I mean), a lack of originality is death. It seems that without originality there is no poetry. Isn't that the whole point? To make readers see the world with new eyes?

In a broader sense, all art forms are about originality. For instance, in blues music, there are phrases that are frequently reused as a way of quoting other artists, or as a kind of short-hand way of creating an emotion, character, or scene. However, there still has to be something you've never heard before.

I guess what I'm saying is this: If a writer has no originality, aren't they wasting their time?

 

[TheDR4KE]

Re: Clarification?

karmadog asked
Drake, what do you mean by "the need for originality stifles writers"?

I guess to put it simply: write to express your true self, your emotions and feelings, the observations of your world, how you relate to the people, events, objects and ideas around you, and you get value out of writing.

Constraints -- this has to rhyme, the plot needs to flow, iambic pentameter, every phrase has to not have been used by someone else -- can be useful for specific purposes, but you need to put them into perspective.

They are dealt with by editing, which is separate from writing.

Re-read your poem or story and cringe at a phrase that snuck out of the advertising influenced corner of your brain ... then cross it out, put yourself back into the place or situation that you're writing about and give it another shot. Another. Again. Once more. Then pick the one that fits best.

Write Edit Write Edit Write and never NEVER mix the two.

In prose, particularly genre fiction, originality CAN be a drawback. Too much originality confuses the unsophisticated reader.

Absolutely. Good software is written to be consistent and predictable and easily learnt. Good computer games are predictable but with very complex rules that engage people who try to learn them. Non-fiction is concise and clear, fiction is engagingly complex yet clear.

On the other hand, "literary" fiction (please don't razz me on the terms, you know what I mean), a lack of originality is death. It seems that without originality there is no poetry. Isn't that the whole point? To make readers see the world with new eyes?

LOL -- I call it literary fiction too ;-) The answer to your question is: No.

For a critic, the point is to be shown the world in a new way.

For a writer the point is to describe the world as you see it.

In a broader sense, all art forms are about originality. For instance, in blues music, there are phrases that are frequently reused as a way of quoting other artists, or as a kind of short-hand way of creating an emotion, character, or scene. However, there still has to be something you've never heard before.

But if you go to a concert from a favourite musician, you want to hear the tunes you know as well as maybe something new that you can talk about. Or is that just something you didn't hear before?

The world changes. Our understanding of the world changes.

In Shakuhachi (a Japanese bamboo flute used for Zen meditative practise) music, there is the concept of original sound. Every note is new, has never been played before, because the world is new every moment. But if your mind is still in the past, then how can you play a note that is here and now?

I guess what I'm saying is this: If a writer has no originality, aren't they wasting their time?

If a writer has no originality then they 1. aren't engaging with the world deeply enough when they try to express it, using learnt phrases rather than their current, aware observation or 2. don't see deeply enough yet into the complexity of the world, which is why experience is so important to art.

Do you see the difference between these two?

Originality comes with focused awareness and deep understanding of your self. Focus on originality and you'll just stop writing... Focus on understanding and eventually you will see deeper than those who came before you, and expressing that understanding will naturally appear original.

Drake

 

[karmadog]

I think I see what you mean.

You're saying, then, that forced originality is what stifles the writer. True originality, being an organic outgrowth of a full self, by definition can neither be forced or learned from another.

I like the way you combine your artistic vision with zen philosophy. Have you ever read "After Ikkyu" by Jim Harrison? I have not read the whole thing, but have read excerpts (sitting on a couch at Barnes and Noble) and I was impressed.

 

[TheDR4KE]

Re: I think I see what you mean.

You're saying, then, that forced originality is what stifles the writer. True originality, being an organic outgrowth of a full self, by definition can neither be forced or learned from another.

Yes, exactly. And wonderfully expressed. I'll have to steal that when next I try to describe the concept, rather than try to be original about it ;-)

I like the way you combine your artistic vision with zen philosophy. Have you ever read "After Ikkyu" by Jim Harrison? I have not read the whole thing, but have read excerpts (sitting on a couch at Barnes and Noble) and I was impressed.

I haven't but will look out for it now, thanks.

Drake

 

[WickedEve]

bump

Bumping up a good thread that discusses using fresh images in poetry.

 

[JUDO]

Fresh Imagery

(a recipe)

• Add one trite, cliché-ridden expression from a poem

• In a seperate bowl, mix two or more conceptual notions from another artistic form.

• Now, carefully keeping the same purpose for the cliché, use the conceptual notions to approach the purpose from a new angle.

• Write the new expression.

• Edit for taste.

-------------
EXAMPLE:

My passion is like a burning flame. (cliché)

Paint brushes & pas de deux (two to mix)

The heat and warmth of my building sexual love (purpose)

Brush bristles dance hot pliéswithin me. (edited new expression)

--------------


- Judo

 

[WickedEve]

Fresh Imagery

(a recipe)

• Add one trite, cliché-ridden expression from a poem

• In a seperate bowl, mix two or more coneptual notions from another artistic form.

• Now, carefully keeping the same purpose for the cliché, use the conceptual notions to approach the purpose from a new angle.

• Write the new expression.

• Edit for taste.

-------------
EXAMPLE:

My passion is like a burning flame. (cliché)

Paint brushes & pas de deux (two to mix)

The heat and warmth of my building sexual love (purpose)

Brush bristles dance hot pliéswithin me. (edited new expression)

--------------


- Judo

Excellent dish that all poets should taste.

 

[JUDO]

(* blushes *) Why, thank you, WE. I was hoping that...wait...uh. Oh! Are you referring to my post!? Damn!

 

[WickedEve]

You should change your name to Wicked Judo. lol

 

[JUDO]

O, the possibilites...

Where does wicked come from anyhow? If you look up the etymology of the word, you'll find (Middle English < wikke - evil, akin to the Old English wicce - meaning witch).

Wicked
Wrecked
Wretched
Witched
Witch

Yeah, not too far.

 

[WickedEve]

There's a little wickedness in us all. Some more than others.

"Evil in principle or practice; deviating from morality; contrary to the moral or divine law; addicted to vice or sin; sinful; immoral; profligate; -- said of persons and things; as, a wicked king; a wicked woman; a wicked deed; wicked designs."