For Angeline

[twelveoone]

Everyone I mentioned writes intelligent poetry, as do maybe 20 other people here. The people chosen I feel are the best examples, only to illustrate the distiction between intelligence and intellectual. Intellectual is a good thing not to overplay, it is an audience limiter for one. Let's keep the defination of intelligence that Raiman and Tzara used, or simply put evidence of a greater degree of thought in the craft.
Obvious: Both you and Rainman avoid the intellectual trap, both write what is easily recogized as well crafted poetry, easily recognzable craft and form, highly linear stories, a successive build to an end, we get the "message", the feeling rather directly. You two may be the best practitioners here on a consistent basis.
The down side, it never sneaks up on you, and has a high tendency to be formulamatic.
Intellectual: is a trap, (references most people will not get, unorthodox but recognizable structures, vocabulary, etc.) the people I mentioned for one reason or another largely escape this trap they set for themselves. The easiest and most accepted way in Post-modern writing is to demolish it though humour, Bogus uses this tactic, as do I. Tzara, Lauren Hyde are also intelligent writers that largely escape the trap (the trap is for both the authour and the audience)
The upside, if done right, is a greater Aha effect.
The down side, the irratation of the confrontation may not go away.
Deceptive Both annaswirls and WickedEve at their best are highly deceptive writers,(but intelligent) using non linear techiques in presentation. The message is in peripheral information. Neither rely highly on recognizable strutures of poetry, as it stands today. (the same rap on Emily Dickenson)
The down side is it can too easily be dismissed, (anna in one of her incarnations I thought was an idiot, at first.)
The upside, when it hits it hits hard, the Aha is overwhelming. And it infects you, both have written things, I can't escape from.

So don't give me any crap about using nicer words like subtle. Any better than average can do subtle. (Everyone mentioned is better than better than average) And a statement like that just adds fuel to some of the morons that abound around here.

 

[BooMerengue]

My feelings are hurt- wheres my name? I wanna see my name in lights, too.




Just kiddin, 1201- I do agree w/ you here. Now go to bed.

 

[Angeline]

Who's giving you crap?

I agree with you. I agreed when you said this in the other thread. I think you've captured the differences between our poetic writing styles very well.

(And on a side note to Boo, I think 1201 is naming the particular poets that he does because we most clearly define the classifications he describes--not every poet fits into a category so clearly, and that is not necessarily a bad thing. As he points out, there is a down side to each type that even the most easily definable of us ((as having that style)) can't always overcome.)

1201, I've thought about this before without naming the qualities of each type as distinctly as you do. One of the things I admire about Liar, for example, is his versatility. He writes equally well in more than one category. I think that's hard to do. I've wondered if the fact that he is not writing in his native language has any bearing on it. The best example of this versatility in a famous writer is Fernando Pessoa, the Portuguese poet. His genius is in that he writes equally well in distinctly different styles.

Each poet develops a distinctive voice that is probably a combination of personal experience and preference. I've tried to write like Eve or Anna. I can't do it. I can reproduce a poor imitation of it, but it doesn't come naturally to me. That may be one of the reasons I like form poetry so much: its structural limitations can force one to practice a style (or voice) different from that which one naturally produces (or gravitates toward) in free verse.

And, honestly, I'm not giving you a hard time when I say I don't see why you reject subtle as being descriptive of a deceptive style. Look at this definition from Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: sub·tle
Pronunciation: 's&-t&l
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): sub·tler /'s&t-l&r, 's&-t&l-&r/; sub·tlest /'s&t-l&st, 's&-t&l-&st/
Etymology: Middle English sutil, sotil, from Middle French soutil, from Latin subtilis, literally, finely textured, from sub- + tela cloth on a loom; akin to Latin texere to weave -- more at TECHNICAL
1 a : DELICATE, ELUSIVE <a subtle fragrance> b : difficult to understand or perceive : OBSCURE <subtle differences in sound>
2 a : PERCEPTIVE, REFINED <a writer's sharp and subtle moral sense> b : having or marked by keen insight and ability to penetrate deeply and thoroughly <a subtle scholar>
3 a : highly skillful : EXPERT <a subtle craftsman> b : cunningly made or contrived : INGENIOUS
4 : ARTFUL, CRAFTY <a subtle rogue>
5 : operating insidiously <subtle poisons>

Maybe it's a fine shade of difference, but I don't think the term, especially in the sense of obscure or elusive, is so distinct from deceptive.

Also, I stubbornly refuse to dismiss any word. Anything can work in the right context.

Then again, maybe I would use it because I am intentionally nice lol. My mother always said "my girls may not be beautiful, but they're polite." (and that btw is yet another reason I may have to write the epic poem "My Mother and Why I'm Neurotic.")

PS Rainy, you gonna disagree with me? Especially since I've likened the style 1201 says we both fit as compatible with form poetry?

 

[Liar]

Then again, maybe I would use it because I am intentionally nice lol. My mother always said "my girls may not be beautiful, but they're polite." (and that btw is yet another reason I may have to write the epic poem "My Mother and Why I'm Neurotic.")

Please do, but could you give it a little bit more

...subtle...

title?

 

[Angeline]

Please do, but could you give it a little bit more

...subtle...

title?

Can I have more coffee first?

 

[Liar]

Can I have more coffee first?

Oh, all right.


Never mind me. I'm just grumpy because despite the nice things you said about me, I can't seem to produce the simplest nursery rhyme at the moment. A very loooong moment.

 

[Angeline]

Oh, all right.


Never mind me. I'm just grumpy because despite the nice things you said about me, I can't seem to produce the simplest nursery rhyme at the moment. A very loooong moment.

I have to go to work in an hour. And I was up pretty late last night. Grumble, grumble.

 

[twelveoone]

Who's giving you crap?

I agree with you. I agreed when you said this in the other thread. I think you've captured the differences between our poetic writing styles very well.

(And on a side note to Boo, I think 1201 is naming the particular poets that he does because we most clearly define the classifications he describes--not every poet fits into a category so clearly, and that is not necessarily a bad thing. As he points out, there is a down side to each type that even the most easily definable of us ((as having that style)) can't always overcome.)

1201, I've thought about this before without naming the qualities of each type as distinctly as you do. One of the things I admire about Liar, for example, is his versatility. He writes equally well in more than one category. I think that's hard to do. I've wondered if the fact that he is not writing in his native language has any bearing on it. The best example of this versatility in a famous writer is Fernando Pessoa, the Portuguese poet. His genius is in that he writes equally well in distinctly different styles.

Each poet develops a distinctive voice that is probably a combination of personal experience and preference. I've tried to write like Eve or Anna. I can't do it. I can reproduce a poor imitation of it, but it doesn't come naturally to me. That may be one of the reasons I like form poetry so much: its structural limitations can force one to practice a style (or voice) different from that which one naturally produces (or gravitates toward) in free verse.

And, honestly, I'm not giving you a hard time when I say I don't see why you reject subtle as being descriptive of a deceptive style. Look at this definition from Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: sub·tle
Pronunciation: 's&-t&l
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): sub·tler /'s&t-l&r, 's&-t&l-&r/; sub·tlest /'s&t-l&st, 's&-t&l-&st/
Etymology: Middle English sutil, sotil, from Middle French soutil, from Latin subtilis, literally, finely textured, from sub- + tela cloth on a loom; akin to Latin texere to weave -- more at TECHNICAL
1 a : DELICATE, ELUSIVE <a subtle fragrance> b : difficult to understand or perceive : OBSCURE <subtle differences in sound>
2 a : PERCEPTIVE, REFINED <a writer's sharp and subtle moral sense> b : having or marked by keen insight and ability to penetrate deeply and thoroughly <a subtle scholar>
3 a : highly skillful : EXPERT <a subtle craftsman> b : cunningly made or contrived : INGENIOUS
4 : ARTFUL, CRAFTY <a subtle rogue>
5 : operating insidiously <subtle poisons>

Maybe it's a fine shade of difference, but I don't think the term, especially in the sense of obscure or elusive, is so distinct from deceptive.

Also, I stubbornly refuse to dismiss any word. Anything can work in the right context.

Then again, maybe I would use it because I am intentionally nice lol. My mother always said "my girls may not be beautiful, but they're polite." (and that btw is yet another reason I may have to write the epic poem "My Mother and Why I'm Neurotic.")

PS Rainy, you gonna disagree with me? Especially since I've likened the style 1201 says we both fit as compatible with form poetry?

Because subtle doesn't work in the context. Subtle is easily recognised. Deceptive is stronger and is used to describe the process of reading not the person. Subtle is one of those wishy-washy words that lose all value talking about poetry, right down there with "witty". 20%-30% of the stuff here can be descibed as having subtle elements. 70-80% of published.
And it is a big leap to go from from formulamatic to forms.
And yes, some not mentioned like Liar who at times suffers from "Intellectual", and Maria2394 who can be deceptive do not consistently follow the patterns used for illustration.
Now I can I magine some thread jumping moron trying to make hay with "inconsistent."

 

[Decayed Angel]

Now I can I magine some thread jumping moron trying to make hay with "inconsistent."

or even "obtuse"

As technology is magic to the uncivilized ancients, certainly "deceptive" and something as subtle as "subtlety" will eventually be branded "obtuse".

m.

 

[Angeline]

Because subtle doesn't work in the context. Subtle is easily recognised. Deceptive is stronger and is used to describe the process of reading not the person. Subtle is one of those wishy-washy words that lose all value talking about poetry, right down there with "witty". 20%-30% of the stuff here can be descibed as having subtle elements. 70-80% of published.
And it is a big leap to go from from formulamatic to forms.
And yes, some not mentioned like Liar who at times suffers from "Intellectual", and Maria2394 who can be deceptive do not consistently follow the patterns used for illustration.
Now I can I magine some thread jumping moron trying to make hay with "inconsistent."

I have to go to work now. Thank you for the discussion. It's interesting and illuminating. (And don't tell me you don't like either of those words. I'm not writing a poem!)

I'm looking forward to reading what others think about all this.

 

[anonamouse]

I have to go to work now. Thank you for the discussion. It's interesting and illuminating. (And don't tell me you don't like either of those words. I'm not writing a poem!)

I'm looking forward to reading what others think about all this.

so would I because a good percent will not follow the trail or the context

 

[lexitopoi]

Because subtle doesn't work in the context. Subtle is easily recognised. Deceptive is stronger and is used to describe the process of reading not the person. Subtle is one of those wishy-washy words that lose all value talking about poetry, right down there with "witty".

Sorry, I can't see what you're aiming for. What's wrong with wit now? It's nothing but a good sense of timing and decorum, to know when and how to break it effectively.

Deceptive carries negative connotations for me. Trickery, dishonesty and lies. Whereas subtlelty is skillfully and tastefully administered reference play and imagery without malice intent. Like good English irony.

Maybe I didn't "follow the trail or the context"? Probably because it was too subtle to find.

 

[twelveoone]

Sorry, I can't see what you're aiming for. What's wrong with wit now? It's nothing but a good sense of timing and decorum, to know when and how to break it effectively.

Deceptive carries negative connotations for me. Trickery, dishonesty and lies. Whereas subtlelty is skillfully and tastefully administered reference play and imagery without malice intent. Like good English irony.

Maybe I didn't "follow the trail or the context"? Probably because it was too subtle to find.

Main Entry: de·cep·tive
Pronunciation: di-'sep-tiv
Function: adjective
: tending or having power to deceive : MISLEADING (caps not mine BTW)
I am aware of it's use with negative connatations.
Both women refered to either use the format of comedy or are wickedly funny. Humour relies on misleading a linear preocess. You are also being mislead if you think these women aren't good, they are..I am talking about the process of reading thier work, not the tactics they employ in writing. Like irony.

 

[twelveoone]

Sorry, I can't see what you're aiming for. What's wrong with wit now? It's nothing but a good sense of timing and decorum, to know when and how to break it effectively.

Deceptive carries negative connotations for me. Trickery, dishonesty and lies. Whereas subtlelty is skillfully and tastefully administered reference play and imagery without malice intent. Like good English irony.

Maybe I didn't "follow the trail or the context"? Probably because it was too subtle to find.

Follow me - most poetry is percieved and processed in your head in a line, successive reinforment of image to convey a feeling, a story if you will, in condensed form. It is upsetting to some because of these preconcieved notions. YOU may be Mislead (deceived) because of these (your) preconcieved notions. You have to read these people differently to get the full impact.