Oral vs Written Poetry

[dr_mabeuse]

Has anyone ever written poetry they specifically intended to be performed orally as opposed to being read? I know there is such a thing as poetry that can only be read (or looked at, as the case may be), but is there such a thing as purely oral/aural poetry?

And if you don't want to talk about that, then I'd be interested in your opinion of poets who read well. I've already mentioned Kerouac, and I've heard Ginsberg.

I think I also heard an early recording of Yeats, who was a horrible reader from what I could tell (the recording quality didn't help) and I've heard Pound, who's very creepy but better in the hearing than in the reading, I think. Almost everyone's heard Frost, for what that's worth.

Anyone else? Isn't there a recording of TS Eliot?


---dr.M.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Oh, I thought this was about something else. I was going to say I'd take Oral over having to write poetry any day.

I never did this, but you got me immediately thinking about an audio poem 03sp had submitted a few months ago, but was deleted in the mean time. It was called digital tape or something close to that, and reading the written version really couldn't even come close to the experience of listening to it as it was created.

Sp, if you're out there! I need to listen to your poem again.

 

[Angeline]

You'll be sorry you asked...

I think poetry is meant to be spoken. For me, reading it aloud or having it read to me is one of life's joys.

And Doc, you are in for a treat. Hie yourself over to the UBUWEB, an amazing collection of historic sound recordings of everyone from Guilliame Apollinaire to James Joyce, ee cummings, William Burroughs, Ed Sanders (yes of Fugs fame--and they're having a reunion show very soon in NYC btw), and many more. UBU was started in the 1970s (I think) and is the brainchild of a group of poets--John Giorno, Burroughs, Ginsberg, and Anne Waldman among others, and is maintained today by Giorno.

Alot of the mp3 files there are taken from historic readings held at St. Mark's in the Bowery Church in NYC. (I used to go every New Year's Eve for the all-night reading--those were the days, sigh.)

From those files, I can highly recommend the Biting Off the Tongue of a Corpse series, with readings from Burroughs, Sanders, Ted Berrigan, Frank O'Hara, and Kenneth Koch (and you must hear Helen Adams' Cheerless Junkie Song, it's a hoot). There is also an incredible performance piece from Patti Smith (when she was still just a poet) called Histories of the Universe.

There's lots of other fascinating stuff there.

Also, as I mentioned in one of the blues threads, you can listen to Weary Blues, a 1950s recording of Langston Hughes reading backed by (among others) Mingus. It's wonderful.

 

[The_Fool]

My Senior High School English Teacher said all poetry should be read aloud and not just read. He even made us get in front of the class and recite various poems....Bastard. No wonder I'm so warped. And I thought that was because Mom dropped me on my head.

 

[destinie21]

to answer your question in the vaugest way possible

I think all poetry should be read aloud but further than that some poems are meant to be read while others are destinied to be delivered in perfomance. which is to say there are some poems that need to be read just right to get the point across. I was onre of those kids in highschool that liked when the teacher made us read poems and I would "hate" when a kid got up and just read a really emotional or hard hitting piece as if he/she were reading a menu or some such trivial thing aloud. When it cam to me I would always get up and read with the emotion the poem evoked in me. Now to the poems I said are to be read: by that I mean not every poem is going to produce a swell of emotions so these are the poems you read. As you would read something important mind you. or in some cases some poetry is just so beautiful that it needs no granduer to express it's attitude it will just be obvious .




pS I realize of course that all poetry is not good there is some so foul it should be imprisined for literar murder of the first degree but alas it's still out there free.

ppS: hate the writting not the writter

 

[Rybka]

My Senior High School English Teacher said all poetry should be read aloud and not just read. He even made us get in front of the class and recite various poems....

Here I must disagree. A lot of the finished poems I write cannot be read aloud, because I try to present various meanings by word placement on the page. A single recitation will miss some/many meanings.

Regards, Rybka

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Isn't almost every song ever written a piece of poetry that is specifically intended to be performed orally as opposed to being read? To answer to the dr.'s orginal question.

 

[OT]

Short answer: No.

Some songs are poems, many are not. Some very good songs are not poems at all. They have a catchy lyric and beat.

(We haven't had a decent "what is poetry" flame around here in a long time )

 

[Violette]

So what's wrong with reading in front of the class?

Okay, I don't care if this makes me look like a goody-goody sicko, but I LOVED reciting poetry in front of the class! Truth be told, I've been reciting poetry since I was 6 years old and recently started performing my own works. So I can honestly say that there is a huge difference between reading and performing poetry!

I have to agree with Angeline (thanks for the UBU link, hon!) in that ALL poetry is meant to be read. For myself, I get a deeper understanding and appreciation for the writer's work when I read it aloud. But in performing poetry, whether yours or someone else's, you obtain a deeper understanding for yourself by the way you present the work to an audience (and in some cases, a classroom). When you perform poetry, if you truly understand what you're reading, it will come across in your presentation. I've been to a few poetry open-mic nights and outright slams, and one thing you do not, can not do, is fake your way through what you're reading, especially at the mike! (yeah, Destinie, when a kid read a poem like he/she was reading a math problem, that drove me nuts, too!)

Short version: Reading poetry puts your voice into the work; performing it orally puts yourself into it. And if you can handle it, and truly embrace it when you perform it, then just keep doing it!

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Short answer: No.

Some songs are poems, many are not. Some very good songs are not poems at all. They have a catchy lyric and beat.

(We haven't had a decent "what is poetry" flame around here in a long time )

OK, I'll bite. You have a "thing" with words (not necessarily) and/or sounds. This "thing" has a certain rhythm. It sets a tone. It will draw an emotional response from its recipients.

How does this differ from poetry? Granted that most will have no poetic value if stripped of its, let's keep it simple and call it music, but what would happen to Shakespeare's poetry if stripped of its consonants?


PS to Violette: SOME poems are conceptually unreadable (out loud, at least, some at all). Check some of the links in Rybka's signature, for example.

 

[Angeline]

Performance vs Reading

If great singers can interpret songs differently, why can't poets read their poems differently at different readings? Just a thought and maybe it doesn't work for every writer or every poem, but think about Billie Holiday and Ella Fitzgerald who recorded many of the same songs, but gave them very different interpretations--Ella often more upbeat, Billie more wistful. Or even the same singer from one take to the next alters phrasing, which creates a different interpretation. The exciting thing for me about performance is that it *is* live, and you can mix things up from one reading to the next.

Also while it's true that we--as individuals--have very different expectations about how readers should interact with our words, a poem (like all writing) can take on a life of its own. It may succeed for readers in ways very different from what I as the writer might have intended.

And Lauren I see your and rybka's point, but I think it applies to relatively few poems. I've heard what would look on paper to be some pretty unperformable avant garde stuff done live.

 

[destinie21]

Short answer: No.

Some songs are poems, many are not. Some very good songs are not poems at all. They have a catchy lyric and beat.

(We haven't had a decent "what is poetry" flame around here in a long time )

Don't poems written in iambic pentameter have a beat when you read them right

 

[champagne1982]

Tumultuous noises

archived elsewhere

 

[champagne1982]

Tumultuous noises

archived elsewhere

 

[champagne1982]

Tumultuous noises

archived elsewhere

 

[OT]

Don't poems written in iambic pentameter have a beat when you read them right

Because some poetry has a beat, it does not follow that everything with a beat is poetry.

 

[OT]

OK, I'll bite. You have a "thing" with words (not necessarily) and/or sounds. This "thing" has a certain rhythm. It sets a tone. It will draw an emotional response from its recipients.

How does this differ from poetry?

If the words can't stand on their own, then I think it's not poetry. An art form, yes, poetry no.

There is a fine line between enhancing a poem (be it by dramatic reading, visual word spacings and fonts, combining it with a picture, setting it to music, etc. ) and creating some other art form whereby there are words involved, but the words in and of themselves are not poetry.

Of course, we're quibbling about labels here.
It matters not what we call "it" as long as it's pleasant/beautiful/interesting/...

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Of course we're quibbling about labels here, but by your definition, there would be no poetry. I propose that words in and of themselves are not poetry. Unless you're suggesting the dictionary is a poetry compilation with a lot of editor's notes.

 

[Angeline]

This is semantics. The bottom line is that what one defines as poetry or any other art form is largely subjective. Some people on another thread here are discussing the thematics underlying Jim Morrison lyrics. Sorry, but to me his lyrics ain't poetry. That's my opinion--you can agree or disagree--but who am I to say *you're* wrong to think they are? If it works for you, good. There's no doubt someone out there who thinks the dictionary is one big poem, and I know there's someone out there who thinks Shakespeare's sonnets aren't poetry, lol. Opinions vary and types of art go in and out of fashion. There doesn't always have to be one right answer.

 

[OT]

Of course we're quibbling about labels here, but by your definition, there would be no poetry.

You misunderstand, and in fact your dictionary example makes my point. Setting the dictionary to a catchy tune doesn't make it poetry. It's the meaningful arrangement of words that are at the essence of poetry.

 

[OT]

High Treason

There doesn't always have to be one right answer.

GASP

(I agree. We're just pass'n the time and keeping the warm weather from melting the brain cells together. In fact, just for fun, on the count of three we are all going to switch and argue the other's side for a bit.)


One ... Two ...

 

[Angeline]

GASP

(I agree. We're just pass'n the time and keeping the warm weather from melting the brain cells together. In fact, just for fun, on the count of three we are all going to switch and argue the other's side for a bit.)


One ... Two ...

Yes dear. Just don't um tell my kids about the no one right answer part.

G'night.

Still hacking (and I *don't* mean computers),
Miz A

 

[Rybka]

Example of a Poem Not Meant to Be Read Outloud

...
I have to agree with Angeline (thanks for the UBU link, hon!) in that ALL poetry is meant to be read. For myself, I get a deeper understanding and appreciation for the writer's work when I read it aloud. But in performing poetry, whether yours or someone else's, you obtain a deeper understanding for yourself by the way you present the work to an audience (and in some cases, a classroom). When you perform poetry, if you truly understand what you're reading, it will come across in your presentation. I've been to a few poetry open-mic nights and outright slams, and one thing you do not, can not do, is fake your way through what you're reading, especially at the mike! (yeah, Destinie, when a kid read a poem like he/she was reading a math problem, that drove me nuts, too!)

Short version: Reading poetry puts your voice into the work; performing it orally puts yourself into it. And if you can handle it, and truly embrace it when you perform it, then just keep doing it!

If this posts properly you will see a .jpg of part of a poem that was not meant to be performed. In fact, if I were to try and perform it, it would make no sense to the audience unless they had read it before and had a printed copy in front of them.

Regards,                                 Rybka

http://greengrouper.com/ggserver/crackerj.jpg

 

[Maria2394]

spoken vs un spoken

When I first saw this thread, I thought, nope, its just the same when not spoken, but I thought what the hell, I tried reading all my "stuff" aloud, despite that fact I dont care much for the sound of my own voice. Guess what? ( duh...LOL) I am finding that yes, It is definitely helping me find places that are not exactly right, therefore making the meter and rhyme better, however, I have to agree with Rybka as well, that some works just aren't suited to being spoken...ie his example. perhaps with the advent of new ideas and such, who knows what will be considered poetry in a hundred years? It would be cool to be around to see, um, hear

bye ya'll, Maria

 

[Rybka]

Re: spoken vs un spoken

When I first saw this thread, I thought, nope, its just the same when not spoken, but I thought what the hell, I tried reading all my "stuff" aloud, despite that fact I dont care much for the sound of my own voice. Guess what? ( duh...LOL) I am finding that yes, It is definitely helping me find places that are not exactly right, therefore making the meter and rhyme better, however, I have to agree with Rybka as well, that some works just aren't suited to being spoken...ie his example. perhaps with the advent of new ideas and such, who knows what will be considered poetry in a hundred years? It would be cool to be around to see, um, hear

bye ya'll, Maria

I am glad that someone has seen my point. Not that I object at all to reading poems out loud, but since visual art has become more than just "realistic", (for which we now have cameras), so can the written word include display of form and space to generate beauty and adjunctive meanings. I may not be a good exemplar for this modern form of poetry, but at least I recognize it as an addition to traditional forms of poetry. Am I crying alone in the wilderness?

Regards,                                 Rybka