Some words are meaningless

[Guest]

…for poetry that is.

I view that some word choices add nothing to a poem and quite possibly take away from good writing. One word I believe that does this is "thing", which I feel is a cop-out word. I'd rather use descriptive words that add meaning and depth to a poem rather than resorting to "thing-ing" a noun. I was wondering if other poets felt the same about certain words, if so, which words do you avoid using because they bring nothing to a poem? Or haven't you put some thought to using such fluff-like words?

 

[wildsweetone]

funny you should mention this. i've written this morning and am now editing out words like 'but' and 'as' because they stick out like a sore thumb and i know i overuse them. (this poem's also smothered in adjectives which i've learnt to allow to drive me nuts - not just single adjectives, but doubles. )

i notice with the culling of the overused words, i can rephrase something and make it tighter. i like that.

 

[TheRainMan]

…for poetry that is.

I view that some word choices add nothing to a poem and quite possibly take away from good writing. One word I believe that does this is "thing", which I feel is a cop-out word. I'd rather use descriptive words that add meaning and depth to a poem rather than resorting to "thing-ing" a noun. I was wondering if other poets felt the same about certain words, if so, which words do you avoid using because they bring nothing to a poem? Or haven't you put some thought to using such fluff-like words?

I am of the opinion that there is no word that can not be used effectively in poetry, if used well.

A word like "thing," I think, can be exploited because of its very vagueness, allowing the poet to either leave open a variety of interpretation for the reader,


. . . midnight is a deep dark thing


or fill in the blanks themselves.


Child by Sylvia Plath


Your clear eye is the one absolutely beautiful thing.
I want to fill it with color and ducks,
The zoo of the new
Whose name you meditate --
April snowdrop, Indian pipe,
Little

Stalk without wrinkle,
Pool in which images
Should be grand and classical

Not this troublous
Wringing of hands, this dark
Ceiling without a star.



I really think it's how you use words in combination, and not any particular word itself, that matters.

For me, no word is off limits.

 

[Guest]

Edited

 

[Angeline]

…for poetry that is.

I view that some word choices add nothing to a poem and quite possibly take away from good writing. One word I believe that does this is "thing", which I feel is a cop-out word. I'd rather use descriptive words that add meaning and depth to a poem rather than resorting to "thing-ing" a noun. I was wondering if other poets felt the same about certain words, if so, which words do you avoid using because they bring nothing to a poem? Or haven't you put some thought to using such fluff-like words?

hiya neoman.

I'm an English teacher, so I tend to think about this in terms of parts of speech. Do others approach it that way?

"Thing" is a biggie for me, too. It's almost always used because the writer isn't being precise. Lots of adjectives or adverbs that are general don't work either, like the quantitative ones--some, many--or qualitative ones--very, quite.

I also try to avoid "ly" adverbs. I read Stephen King's book on writing and he talks about how they can take the place of more interesting descriptive language. I had never thought about that before but the more I did, the more sense it made.

Lots of people think gerunds ("ing" words) are a no-no in poems, but I don't rule them out. It's easy to overuse them though, so I'll often consciously go back and change them.

I really try not to get hung up about cliches though I do try to weed them out when I edit. They're easy to miss though, which is why it's good to have others read one's drafts and give feedback. I'll notice them in others' poems when I miss them in my own. I also know some people will avoid certain words like the plague (speaking of cliches lol)--words like "moon" or "heart" or "bones," but I think they can work in the right context.

I'm also very conscious of not overusing articles and prepositions because I think they add a prose quality that can detract from the impact of uh poeticness.

I said this in some other thread: some words are nebulous or are used in a nebulous way. It's boring, for example, to write "He felt passion" or "They loved each other." That's explaining as opposed to using imagery to show.

When I edit I think about what exactly I'm trying to say, ask myself what is the exact quality of whatever I'm trying to communicate. That process, more than anything else, helps me get it right. Overall though I believe any word can work if it's used in the right place in the right way.

Good idea for a thread btw. I'm interested to see what others think about this.

 

[TheRainMan]

I'm an English teacher, so I tend to think about this in terms of parts of speech. Do others approach it that way?

Good idea for a thread btw. I'm interested to see what others think about this.

I am too. And I always think in terms of parts of speech. The curse of English instructors, perhaps.

I think nouns and verbs are the heart and soul of poetry, just as they are the heart and soul of the language. So I try to allow them to dominate, and attempt to use modifiers (particularly one-word modifiers, adjectives and adverbs) with discrimination and care.

And yes - this is a great idea for a thread.

 

[Angeline]

I am too. And I always think in terms of parts of speech. The curse of English instructors, perhaps.

I think nouns and verbs are the heart and soul of poetry, just as they are the heart and soul of the language. So I try to allow them to dominate, and attempt to use modifiers (particularly one-word modifiers, adjectives and adverbs) with discrimination and care.

And yes - this is a great idea for a thread.

Hahaha! You beat me to the punch. I was going to say Look RainMan we agree and it's probably because we're both English teachers.

You're right on about nouns and verbs. Screwing up verb tense, especially, can affect the whole poem.

I think we are trained (from overexposure to grammar lol) to consciously see it this way, but I think most good writers probably correct themselves without stopping to notice that process.

 

[The_Fool]

There is no specific word that is off limits.

Most poetry is written as to evoke a feeling or visual image that is outlined by the writer and filled in by the reader. Because of its (usually) compact nature, the language is distilled to the essence of that poem.

So what? What the hell are you saying fool? Where I am going with this is, the language of poetry needs to be powerful. If I am going to describe my impression of apparel to a lady, words such as fine, nice and okay are all words that I am going to avoid. The same goes for poetry.


Obviously for every general statement, there is an exception.

 

[Tathagata]

there is a fine line between " careful word choice' and making the poem read like a thesaurus.
there should be an element of , I believe, almost conversation about it.
that being said, that does include more formal language that, in less media frenzied times, was the norm for letters etc.

I think if you read a poem out loud it should give you an idea of how the writer speaks, even if they only speak like that to a loved one or an infant.

I think the whole point of poetry is to present the everyday as miraculous or extraordinary or universal.
To present a moment in time , itself so fleeting, in a way that becomes eternal.

life doesn't require proper grammar, but it helps sometimes.


oh and yes
spelling counts

 

[bogusbrig]

Meaningless words, i.e Meaningless, as in 'having no meaning.'

I understand what neonurotic means but I don't think it's the words that are the problem as all words have meaning and value. Its the way they are used.

A 'thing' can be quite menacing in the dark but rather mundane to the point of being blind to it in the light.

 

[Maria2394]

Hahaha! You beat me to the punch. I was going to say Look RainMan we agree and it's probably because we're both English teachers.

You're right on about nouns and verbs. Screwing up verb tense, especially, can affect the whole poem.

I think we are trained (from overexposure to grammar lol) to consciously see it this way, but I think most good writers probably correct themselves without stopping to notice that process.

I'm not an English teacher, and I agree with both of you, RainMan and Angeline

I took college level classes, never "finished" a degree, but had a heavy concentration in English ( and bio-science classes), last count I had 7 English, the last was a workshop in creative writing. That professor drilled it into us about the part s of speech and their use/place in a poetry. I try to subvert his instructions every chance I get though because he truly couldnt write poetry, he did give me an A, but I had to tell him why I deserved it, lol.

I normally avoid technical discussions like this, basically, I hate to look stupid, but there are just some words that ruin a poem for me, unless its a VERY creative, new use for that word.

I remember Eve once posted a list of words to avoid in poetry, and when I read a poem loaded with passion, alabaster skin, throbbing, ANYTHING throbbing, loses me, gag, just boring, overused words. Even thing is a better word than some of the really overused ones. I have probably used them, I admit it, and I should be shot!!!!

yep, neo, good thread

 

[annaswirls]

SennaJawa told me when I first came here that there is never a good reason to use the word "so" as in you are so beautiful.

You are a poet! I think is what he said. You can do better!

Every time the word pops into a poem, I am so embarassed and remove it ever so quickly and realize each time he is so so right.

but who knows, I am certain that it could be useful in the right circumstance and stuff

 

[TheRainMan]

SennaJawa told me when I first came here that there is never a good reason to use the word "so" as in you are so beautiful.

You are a poet! I think is what he said. You can do better!

Every time the word pops into a poem, I am so embarassed and remove it ever so quickly and realize each time he is so so right.

but who knows, I am certain that it could be useful in the right circumstance and stuff

I really do feel that every word, and I mean every word, in the language can be used well . . .just as every word in the language can be used poorly.

Here is an example where I think the word 'so' is used in the way you describe it (as an adverb describing an adjective), and used well.

I'm putting up the whole poem, because I don't think you can judge one word in isolation, or apart from the whole.


The Connoisseuse of Slugs

When I was a connoisseuse of slugs
I would part the ivy leaves, and look for the
naked jelly of those gold bodies,
translucent strangers glistening along the
stones, slowly, their gelatinous bodies
at my mercy. Made mostly of water, they would shrivel
to nothing if they were sprinkled with salt,
but I was not interested in that. What I liked
was to draw aside the ivy, breathe the
odor of the wall, and stand there in silence
until the slug forgot I was there
and sent its antennae up out of its
head, the glimmering umber horns
rising like telescopes, until finally the
sensitive knobs would pop out the
ends, delicate and intimate. Years later,
when I first saw a naked man,
I gasped with pleasure to see that quiet
mystery reenacted, the slow
elegant being coming out of hiding and
gleaming in the dark air, eager and so
trusting you could weep.

-- Sharon Olds

 

[Tzara]

I think the important thing in poetry is to make all of your words count--meaning, sound, rhythm--and to get rid of all extraneous words.

There are certain kinds of routine scans I do on later drafts--looking at "ing" words, polysyllabic words, adjectives, etc. But I don't have any hard and fast rules. In fact, when someone suggests "you must never use the word (fill in the blank) in a poem" I start thinking about how I might write something that uses it.

Here's another example of the use of the word "thing" in a poem that not only works, but pretty much has to be there for the poem to work. I've posted this one before:

You Know Where You Did Despise
Alexander Pope

You know where you did despise
(Tother day) my little Eyes,
Little Legs, and little Thighs,
And some things, of little Size,
You know where.

You, tis true, have fine black eyes,
Taper legs, and tempting Thighs,
Yet what more than all we prize
Is a Thing of little Size,
You know where.​

 

[wildsweetone]

i have to say i'm finding it interesting to notice the different connotations of these 'simpler' words in poems you all are quoting. far better for them to have meaning rather than simply being used as wall bog.

 

[anonamouse]

SennaJawa told me when I first came here that there is never a good reason to use the word "so" as in you are so beautiful.

You are a poet! I think is what he said. You can do better!

Every time the word pops into a poem, I am so embarassed and remove it ever so quickly and realize each time he is so so right.

but who knows, I am certain that it could be useful in the right circumstance and stuff

Dogma, what these are are trusms.
A guess what a truism is, is something that basically seems right to tell someone else to follow forever.

there is never a good reason...
one should never, never, never....what... what...what, use the same word in a poem, as Amri Baraka was alleged to have said in a workshop once,
use Oh! ~ oh that was you, that said that.

Intent and effect, does it work in a way similiar to how I want it to work for certain audiences.

Where is Senna Jawa any way?

 

[annaswirls]

well damn, I did not intend to misrepresent him. The way I used the so should never be done. Sharon used it differently--

Ha! I did tell you that I did not like Oh! But I don't think I said never Oh! Never!

hmm although I might have. I can be dramatic.

Dogma, what these are are trusms.
A guess what a truism is, is something that basically seems right to tell someone else to follow forever.

there is never a good reason...
one should never, never, never....what... what...what, use the same word in a poem, as Amri Baraka was alleged to have said in a workshop once,
use Oh! ~ oh that was you, that said that.

Intent and effect, does it work in a way similiar to how I want it to work for certain audiences.

Where is Senna Jawa any way?

 

[TheRainMan]

Sharon used it differently--

No, she didn't.

It is exactly the same, an adverb describing an adjective...just like "so beautiful"...."so trusting."

 

[annaswirls]

No, she didn't.

It is exactly the same, an adverb describing an adjective...just like "so beautiful"...."so trusting."

no, it isn't.

differently in that there was a need for it in her poem. the word made sense and did not sound juvenile as if she were cracking gum like, you know what I mean?

hey what are you doing here, don't you have a website to check out and make sure it is ready for an announcement?

 

[TheRainMan]

no, it isn't.

differently in that there was a need for it in her poem. the word made sense and did not sound juvenile as if she were cracking gum like, you know what I mean?

hey what are you doing here, don't you have a website to check out and make sure it is ready for an announcement?

yes it is.

you said...

...there is never a good reason to use the word "so" as in you are so beautiful.

You are a poet! I think is what he said. You can do better!

Every time the word pops into a poem, I am so embarassed and remove it ever so quickly and realize each time he is so so right.

so, you take it back?

nah....

 

[annaswirls]

yes it is.

you said...




so, you take it back?

nah....

no, it isn't the same.

It works in some situations, and the one I was referring to, when Senna Jawa told me not to use "so" he was right. It sucked.

Just like there may be good reason to use "Oh!" in a poem but

Oh! It is the time
of the season for loving.
Oh! What's your name?
Who's your daddy?

Is not one of those times.

 

[annaswirls]

Oh! And I already did take back the never statement, certainly SJ would not have used such strong words. I back pedalled on that one back in 1201's response.

Damn, I did not know people were actually paying attention to what I wrote!

Oh!

It is like our discussion of the ing ing ing words, the generalization that they can be a no no in poetry. Even if in two poems they are used in the same way ie same part of speech, in one poem they might be fine, and another lordy y'all need to slice those ings off of there. So in that sense, they are used differently.

 

[TheRainMan]

no, it isn't the same.

It works in some situations, and the one I was referring to, when Senna Jawa told me not to use "so" he was right. It sucked.

Just like there may be good reason to use "Oh!" in a poem but

Oh! It is the time
of the season for loving.
Oh! What's your name?
Who's your daddy?

Is not one of those times.

Then we agree.

Any word can have a place, if used well.

I thought you were saying the word "so" should never be used.

And don't you have a website to tidy up, missy.

 

[annaswirls]

Then we agree.


oh rats I was hoping you would challenge me to a wrestle

Any word can have a place, if used well.

I thought you were saying the word "so" should never be used.

well, um, I kind of was. eh hem.
usually. ever so rarely.

And don't you have a website to tidy up, missy.

shush can't you see I am waiting until 11:59?

so you wanna wrestle or what?

 

[TheRainMan]

so you wanna wrestle or what?

In a steel cage . . . no escape.