In defence of mediocrity

[bogusbrig]

I don't know if anyone here goes to poetry readings and what their experiences are but having been to more than my fair share and read at a few, I have noticed a few things.

Most poems that are read are not long enough. Before you tune into the poem it is over and many a good poem on the page dies when read aloud, simply because its like a car whizzing past on a motorway, even when the poet/reader's announciation is perfectly dramatized. There is no time to dwell upon it, savour it, study it.

There is also an air of reverence given to much poetry in the same way works of art are given reverence, merely by being in a public gallery regardless of quality or in this case, read to a masochistic audience. For my money you can't perform a poem that is revered. Reverence gives something an air akin to a holy relic and probably of just as iffy in its origins as well.

However, the most enjoyable experiences I've had at poetry readings are with poems that look pretty iffy on the page but performed with gusto to entertain the audience and long enough for the audience to get to grips with the music of the poet's voice.

Now this is where I'm going to defend mediocrity. The best poems I've seen/heard performed (and I've seen some rated poets) are nowhere near the best poems I have read but then, listening to a performance is a completely different experience to reading a book and should be treated as such.

This is where I plug my poem that is in New Poems today Farewell Superman. A poem I specifically wrote for performing at a poetry reading for a Sint Nicholas special in a local bar. (Actually its an excuse for a piss up and hopefully there will be a few female poets with a loose attitude as our very own CC )

But to give this thread a little bit of serious pretence. Has anyone got any experiences to share of poetry readings?

 

[Tzara]

I don't know if anyone here goes to poetry readings and what their experiences are but having been to more than my fair share and read at a few, I have noticed a few things.

Most poems that are read are not long enough. Before you tune into the poem it is over and many a good poem on the page dies when read aloud, simply because its like a car whizzing past on a motorway, even when the poet/reader's announciation is perfectly dramatized. There is no time to dwell upon it, savour it, study it.

There is also an air of reverence given to much poetry in the same way works of art are given reverence, merely by being in a public gallery regardless of quality or in this case, read to a masochistic audience. For my money you can't perform a poem that is revered. Reverence gives something an air akin to a holy relic and probably of just as iffy in its origins as well.

However, the most enjoyable experiences I've had at poetry readings are with poems that look pretty iffy on the page but performed with gusto to entertain the audience and long enough for the audience to get to grips with the music of the poet's voice.

Now this is where I'm going to defend mediocrity. The best poems I've seen/heard performed (and I've seen some rated poets) are nowhere near the best poems I have read but then, listening to a performance is a completely different experience to reading a book and should be treated as such.

This is where I plug my poem that is in New Poems today Farewell Superman. A poem I specifically wrote for performing at a poetry reading for a Sint Nicholas special in a local bar. (Actually its an excuse for a piss up and hopefully there will be a few female poets with a loose attitude as our very own CC )

But to give this thread a little bit of serious pretence. Has anyone got any experiences to share of poetry readings?

I have never actually gone to a poetry reading, but I have listened to poets read their work on recordings. Most are terrible readers. Probably not surprising.

Reading a poem is performance. I don't think there is any reason to think that someone who can write well can also perform what they have written well. Some might, of course, but by and large I would think that these talents would be uncorrelated. You wouldn't, for example, expect a playwright or a screenwriter to be a good actor. Some may be (Sam Shepard comes to mind), but I would think that would be the exception rather than the rule.

For those with a penchant for performance and writing, I think they nowadays often end up as pop stars, and their poems end up as song lyrics. This assumes they can sing, of course. Both Bob Dylan and Jim Morrison wrote poems, for example. More recently, Jewel and Billy Corrigan have. That doesn't mean their poems are any good, just that they think of themselves as poets as well as musicians.

I don't know that I would agree with your statement about mediocrity of a poem and its suitability for performance. I would say that simplicity is important, though. Whatever one thinks of Pound's Cantos, I would think they would be almost impossible to try and perform well. Billy Collins, on the other hand, I think performs well. His style is straightforward and translates well to reading.

It comes down, I think, to how you have imagined the experience of the poem. If largely verbal, it will probably read well in performance. If you depend a lot on what the reader sees on the page, it probably won't.

 

[bogusbrig]

I don't know that I would agree with your statement about mediocrity of a poem and its suitability for performance. I would say that simplicity is important, though. Whatever one thinks of Pound's Cantos, I would think they would be almost impossible to try and perform well. Billy Collins, on the other hand, I think performs well. His style is straightforward and translates well to reading.

I've always looked on this in a similar way to books being translated into films. For the most part books that are telling a straight narrative and rely little on nuance and what is happening in the character's head tend to make better films than very literary books for the most part because they give a director more room to manouevre. That isn't always the case but generally speaking it is. Though a brilliant director might be creative enough to bring the most difficult book to the screen but unfortunately the film will always have to compete with the book in the minds of the audience that know both.

Having sat (sadly usually endured) a poetry reading where I've been familiar with the poetry being recited through reading it originally from the page, I find a similar conflict. Let's take Wasteland and all its complexity. While listening to it being read aloud, even with a brilliant performance, one will never fully appreciate its complexity in one performace and while one might have enjoyed the performance, the chances are one wouldn't fully appreciate its richness. Which is no reason why it shouldn't be performed, like Shakespeare, one can sit through the same play endlessly as long as the performances were good.

Now a mediocre poem can be performed with all the verve and gusto while beer is being served. It is of the moment, the experience. The performance being as important as the poem, it is candy floss, its entertainment. Hmmm....but I guess not much in the way of serious culture but I got interested in poetry through the antics of the Mersey poets and seeing them entertain while they read poetry.

But I take you point, simplicity is probably the most important character of a poem that lends itself to be performed.

 

[Tzara]

But I take you point, simplicity is probably the most important character of a poem that lends itself to be performed.

I've thought about this some more and I think I don't want to use the word "simplicity" to descibe the quality I mean. "Clarity" might be better.

Your example of Eliot's 'The Waste Land" is a good one, as it is not a straightforward poem to read. How does one handle the footnotes, for example? The fact that part of the poem is in foreign language?

I think what I was trying to say was that a poem that reads well in performance is a poem that is easily comprehensible aurally. That is almost, but not quite, a tautology, I suppose. Poetry originated as an aural tradition, but certainly would not today be considered a strictly oral art.

Performed poetry is a little bit on a gradient between poetry and play. Many poets (notably Yeats and Eliot) have written verse plays. The solo work of reciting a poem has a very long and rich tradition. Like, uh, think of Homer.

I envy those (like you, bb) who have the ability to read poems for performance. Very different from what I can do. A rather different experience, but a very important aesthetic one.

Why, in my opinion, there is no one satisfying definition of "what is poetry?"

 

[DeepAsleep]

On the subject of performance, and poetry (Which is where I live; performing my work is the best part):

To go over well at a poetry reading, you have to want to. As a slam (<--competition) poet, you have to have a good grasp of what people will respond to, and what they won't. Some poems are simply more page than stage, and vice versa. The best performers I know (and I've run across several who are very good) practice their stuff to perfection before anyone ever sees it. Personally, when I get done with a new piece, I take it to an open mic (there are seven open mics, weekly, in omaha) and try it out before I commit it to memory, or hack out performance, so I'll know in advance what works and will have had time to change or rework, or anticipate what didn't work and see if I can't make the performance carry it over better.

On the subject of open mic poetry:

I fucking hate open mics. With a passion. But I continue to go, because they surprise me often enough to make it worthwhile. You have to wade through a lot of shit to get at the good stuff. The poem I just submitted, empty stage, is all about what I don't like hearing at open mics, more than anything. Simple poems are nice, poetry about the mundane is nice, but people so rarely say anything moving, or (and here, my ego might get in my way) worthwhile. I try to make all of my poems hit home and I'm happiest when it makes people uncomfortable. I have a piece called 'five weeks pink' that's about a girl aborting herself in my bathtub. (Non-fiction)... I break it out when I want to see people's faces go white. It's not all pretty, and that's what's beautiful.

Aaaaaaanyway. If open mics aren't doing it for you, hunt down a slam. You'll hear a lot of nothing, dressed up as amazing, but it's at least entertaining.

~R

 

[Tzara]

On the subject of performance, and poetry (Which is where I live; performing my work is the best part):

To go over well at a poetry reading, you have to want to. As a slam (<--competition) poet, you have to have a good grasp of what people will respond to, and what they won't. Some poems are simply more page than stage, and vice versa. The best performers I know (and I've run across several who are very good) practice their stuff to perfection before anyone ever sees it. Personally, when I get done with a new piece, I take it to an open mic (there are seven open mics, weekly, in omaha) and try it out before I commit it to memory, or hack out performance, so I'll know in advance what works and will have had time to change or rework, or anticipate what didn't work and see if I can't make the performance carry it over better.

On the subject of open mic poetry:

I fucking hate open mics. With a passion. But I continue to go, because they surprise me often enough to make it worthwhile. You have to wade through a lot of shit to get at the good stuff. The poem I just submitted, empty stage, is all about what I don't like hearing at open mics, more than anything. Simple poems are nice, poetry about the mundane is nice, but people so rarely say anything moving, or (and here, my ego might get in my way) worthwhile. I try to make all of my poems hit home and I'm happiest when it makes people uncomfortable. I have a piece called 'five weeks pink' that's about a girl aborting herself in my bathtub. (Non-fiction)... I break it out when I want to see people's faces go white. It's not all pretty, and that's what's beautiful.

Aaaaaaanyway. If open mics aren't doing it for you, hunt down a slam. You'll hear a lot of nothing, dressed up as amazing, but it's at least entertaining.

~R

You know, DA, I am sorely tempted to fly to Omaha and attend one of your performances. Rotterdam and bb would be even better, but I am not compensated quite well enough to offhand fly to Europe to attend a poetry reading. Maybe if he buys the beer. Maybe if he buys me stock in a brewery.

I am envious of you who do performance. I can't. Don't have the voice for it, don't have the chutzpah for it, don't have the poems for it. Mine ain't suitable. Performance is, I think, a different medium from print poetry. Similar, though complementary, in fact. Fundamentally different.

When I read your poems, I always hear them spoken in kind of a rushed voice. In other words, I think of them as very aural--meant to be heard aloud. Why perhaps they work well in performance.

 

[annaswirls]

I have done some readings, have gone to many. Some very painful, some very good.

The people who do a lot of readings and especially Slam poets that I have spoken with write their work to be read. It is a part of the "formula" (not that I would ever claim that there was a magic formula, just a part of the plan, it is on their mind while writing.)

I do not write my work to be read out loud. When I started going to a poetry group where we read out loud to each other, I started unconsciously writing with the reading in my mind. I did not like what it did to my style. It is a tough call. I DID however, find, that my editing improved when I was reading out loud, mostly when I would read them over before heading out.

Mediocrity? Maybe. Simplicity? Perhaps that is more the term. You cannot re-read a line when listening to a poem. When I went to see Robert Pinsky, he was amazing, the poetry and the reading. Well practiced. Reading his poetry from a page, you did not get the feel that he was speaking out loud to you, but he definately had it down.

But yes, DA the shock value is definately a factor. I remember the Slam guy introducing me saying something like this girl is messed up one minute she is talking about taking her kids on a walk through the woods and then next poem is all ass fuck.



Have not hooked into any real Austin scene yet, I don't think I will go back into the Slam venue. It was bizarre to me, after going several times, hearing the same schtick, the same poems over and again, felt a bit contrived. Some of the poets seemed to be trying to seek out adventure so they would have something to slam on about instead of the other way around. And having said that goddamn, there are some fucking amazing slam poets out there. My favorites were the dudes in Baltimore who could do the amazing sounds with their mouths so they were part song part rhythm section part verse, so fucking cool.... actually I think my favorite one was from Detroit. I have to get his name to recommend him.

I would love to see DA and BB and denis hale I bet would put on a great show as would Eve. Come on, y'all how about a literotica UTube show?

 

[Maria2394]

I have done some readings, have gone to many. Some very painful, some very good.

The people who do a lot of readings and especially Slam poets that I have spoken with write their work to be read. It is a part of the "formula" (not that I would ever claim that there was a magic formula, just a part of the plan, it is on their mind while writing.)

I do not write my work to be read out loud. When I started going to a poetry group where we read out loud to each other, I started unconsciously writing with the reading in my mind. I did not like what it did to my style. It is a tough call. I DID however, find, that my editing improved when I was reading out loud, mostly when I would read them over before heading out.

Mediocrity? Maybe. Simplicity? Perhaps that is more the term. You cannot re-read a line when listening to a poem. When I went to see Robert Pinsky, he was amazing, the poetry and the reading. Well practiced. Reading his poetry from a page, you did not get the feel that he was speaking out loud to you, but he definately had it down.

But yes, DA the shock value is definately a factor. I remember the Slam guy introducing me saying something like this girl is messed up one minute she is talking about taking her kids on a walk through the woods and then next poem is all ass fuck.



Have not hooked into any real Austin scene yet, I don't think I will go back into the Slam venue. It was bizarre to me, after going several times, hearing the same schtick, the same poems over and again, felt a bit contrived. Some of the poets seemed to be trying to seek out adventure so they would have something to slam on about instead of the other way around. And having said that goddamn, there are some fucking amazing slam poets out there. My favorites were the dudes in Baltimore who could do the amazing sounds with their mouths so they were part song part rhythm section part verse, so fucking cool.... actually I think my favorite one was from Detroit. I have to get his name to recommend him.

I would love to see DA and BB and denis hale I bet would put on a great show as would Eve. Come on, y'all how about a literotica UTube show?

I would pay to see that!!

we have an active Slam poetry community here in Columbia, but I havent gone yet. I was listed on the SC Poets Roster, ( I think), they asked me for my bio info and credits as well as contact info... I get their invites and emails, but still havent gone to any readings or group activities. With all the out of town work and "things" concerning my girlie in college, I just cant find the time. Im sure that will happen soon as the shut down season is over for us, unless we want to go to Texas or Florida, and I am always game for Florida

now that you live in Texas, I would beg hubby to take a job there for us

good thread, you guys

M

 

[bogusbrig]

I would love to see DA and BB and denis hale I bet would put on a great show as would Eve. Come on, y'all how about a literotica UTube show?

I'm at a local poetry reading in January with a few friends, I'll see if anyone has a camcorder and I'll read in English. (I sometimes have my poems translated and read in Dutch and I was planning to read in Dutch at this meet because of the nature of it.)

Though I read or at least recite rather than slam. Farewell Superman is going to be read in fancy dress so I guess that will be more of a slam but its really going to be a party.

 

[DeepAsleep]

Slam and I sort of found each other. I didn't write with performance in mind - my way of writing just happens to work that way - sometimes.

I agree that you do hear a lot of the same poems, and that it does feel contrived. There are a host of jokes about what you'll hear at a slam:

1 person who's overcome cancer
2 people who scream revolution
and one woman who's been raped (winner)

Crass, but there's a nugget of truth.

S'why I try to use slam poems about... different things. I don't want their rhythm, or meter, i don't want to write about what they do, and I won't do fictional poetry. I don't win as much as I think I could, if I were a little more flexible about my personal rules, but I'm likely going to be on the Omaha team this year, so I'll try and get down to nationals and shake things up, but... no guarantees. (whether I'll make it, or whether i'll make a difference)

 

[annaswirls]

controversy

rats, wish I still had a baby, I could nurse it while Slamming

 

[champagne1982]

rats, wish I still had a baby, I could nurse it while Slamming

LMAO

Lookit this baby on mah tit
see it suckle, doesn't it
offend you all to shit?

 

[annaswirls]

LMAO

Lookit this baby on mah tit
see it suckle, doesn't it
offend you all to shit?

oh breastfed baby shit don't stink yknow

 

[DeepAsleep]

I'd prolly give titties a ten, if I were judging.

~r