When outside doesn't connect with inside ...

[butters]

do you feel like you've cheated when writing a poem?

is it a bit like faking an O?

does it matter?

if it matters, to whom does it matter? the reader, or only the author?

i admit to having sometimes written pieces that end up to me as no more than nice/clever/witty arrangements of words on a screen. i've even had lots of praise for these and end up feeling a big ol' cheat because they've either begun as not meaning anything to me, or once did but got revised out of any semblance of what they began as. i end up feeling totally divorced from them and I know, if no one else does, that they're missing that element that - for me - is pretty damned important to my own integrity as a writer.

So if others get pleasure from reading these pieces we no longer feel in any way attached to, does it matter?

 

[UnderYourSpell]

I've got stuff on here that have had comments attached from someboy reading a whole new meaning in them and praising me for it. I just smile and think well when I wrote it I didn't mean that at all but if that's how you get pleasure from it then carry on

 

[Epmd607]

Some people divorce themselves from the interpretation of their poem once it's written. The poem can't be misinterpreted. They'd only feel like they cheated themselves, because the reader's reaction is irrelevant to how they feel about what they've written.

Most write poems intending them to be interpreted in fairly narrow way. If someone interprets something else they can't just run with it and say, "Yes, I see that too." But that's lazy, they know they've failed.

The biggest cheaters just write what seems like a poem so people will pat their backs. They don't care about communicating anything besides for how wonderful they are as a poet. Everyone is probably lazy like that once in a while. There are poems where you might intend the sound to be more important than meaning. I'm undecided on those poems.

 

[Angeline]

Some people divorce themselves from the interpretation of their poem once it's written. The poem can't be misinterpreted. They'd only feel like they cheated themselves, because the reader's reaction is irrelevant to how they feel about what they've written.

Most write poems intending them to be interpreted in fairly narrow way. If someone interprets something else they can't just run with it and say, "Yes, I see that too." But that's lazy, they know they've failed.

The biggest cheaters just write what seems like a poem so people will pat their backs. They don't care about communicating anything besides for how wonderful they are as a poet. Everyone is probably lazy like that once in a while. There are poems where you might intend the sound to be more important than meaning. I'm undecided on those poems.

I'm not sure how you can tell who is and isn't cheating or intending to be interpreted narrowly. I don't think I can, not always anyway.

I can be glib in my writing, I do know I am capable of that. If I'm writing something and I feel like it's headed to glibsville I do stop the poem or even take a break from writing. And I do agree that some people care a whole lot more about the anticipated glory than the words or the work. But I think there's generally an inverse relationship of ego to talent: the best writers have the most insecurity about how good they are. It's best to try to rise above that lol. smithpeter used to talk a lot about the need to "rise above it."

 

[butters]

I've got stuff on here that have had comments attached from someboy reading a whole new meaning in them and praising me for it. I just smile and think well when I wrote it I didn't mean that at all but if that's how you get pleasure from it then carry on

i have to admit to that, too - but then people, readers, each bring something unique to the table as they read our words. that interface is different for every person interacting with the poem. everyone has different experiences they draw upon to make sense of what we've written, and although it's wonderful for the writer when a reader absolutely 'gets' their write, i don't think additional interpretations are necessarily a bad thing or a fault of the poem.

 

[CharleyH]

So if others get pleasure from reading these pieces we no longer feel in any way attached to, does it matter?

It matters that I am not happy, or elated with a piece of writing I have done. What else matters from a writer perspective? Not a reader, not a critic ... only YOU can be ultimately be proud of what you have written. If you are proud, no other opinion matters.

 

[butters]

Some people divorce themselves from the interpretation of their poem once it's written. The poem can't be misinterpreted. They'd only feel like they cheated themselves, because the reader's reaction is irrelevant to how they feel about what they've written.

Most write poems intending them to be interpreted in fairly narrow way. If someone interprets something else they can't just run with it and say, "Yes, I see that too." But that's lazy, they know they've failed.

The biggest cheaters just write what seems like a poem so people will pat their backs. They don't care about communicating anything besides for how wonderful they are as a poet. Everyone is probably lazy like that once in a while. There are poems where you might intend the sound to be more important than meaning. I'm undecided on those poems.

they do, but have you never written a poem that when you read it feels as if written by someone else? it's all outside and nothing of you in it? and if it had been written by another poet, you'd quite like it?

i think this might be true, most of the time, but with a sizable percentage of poets happy to leave theirs open to the interpretation of the readers. particularly so when deliberate ambiguities are introduced with the intention of setting the readers off on virtual forked paths of meaning. like UYS, i'm happy for others to read other aspects into my work as well as get my intentions. as for those who completely miss what i meant to get across, well once again it's a consider the source thingy for me. if these are people i respect as readers/writers/blah de blah, then i have to take another look to see what i'm doing wrong. it'd be lazy not to. and yeah, i've been lazy before. but, if these are people whose own writing sucks or whose interpretative skills rival a melon on a dull afternoon then i'm not bothered. let them draw from it what they will. the whole cop out thing for me is about this awareness that the words aren't a part of me inside.

if a poem's all about sound, surely it still needs to operate at a level of poetry or it becomes a work of something else? hasn't it got to work at both levels to be true to itself as poetry?

 

[butters]

It matters that I am not happy, or elated with a piece of writing I have done. What else matters from a writer perspective? Not a reader, not a critic ... only YOU can be ultimately be proud of what you have written. If you are proud, no other opinion matters.

looks like i might have to just go right on living with my own sense of *it's a cheat poem* then. pfft, not like i'm gonna jump from a tall building or even visit the Chelsea

 

[Angeline]

i have to admit to that, too - but then people, readers, each bring something unique to the table as they read our words. that interface is different for every person interacting with the poem. everyone has different experiences they draw upon to make sense of what we've written, and although it's wonderful for the writer when a reader absolutely 'gets' their write, i don't think additional interpretations are necessarily a bad thing or a fault of the poem.

Actually that's another interesting question: how much does anyone have to "get" a poem to enjoy it. I mean the first time I ever read Prufrock, I knew zip about Shakespeare or the Lost Generation, but by the time I read the first reference to the yellow smoke I knew I was reading a great poem.

 

[butters]

Actually that's another interesting question: how much does anyone have to "get" a poem to enjoy it. I mean the first time I ever read Prufrock, I knew zip about Shakespeare or the Lost Generation, but by the time I read the first reference to the yellow smoke I knew I was reading a great poem.

questions questions questions

that's why it's sometimes a pleasant surprise to re-read stuff you first did yonks ago, only this time you find so much more to it that it's like reading a new poem! or seeing a film again with all those cut scenes reinstated!

 

[butters]

Prufrock

i love that poem, the more i read it, the more i love it. the sounds, the pacing, the imagery

sigh

lubberly!

 

[CharleyH]

looks like i might have to just go right on living with my own sense of *it's a cheat poem* then. pfft, not like i'm gonna jump from a tall building or even visit the Chelsea

I dunno, Chippy. I guess you keep writing and hope that people can see the divide of your writing ... the good, the bad and the ugly.

 

[butters]

I dunno, Chippy. I guess you keep writing and hope that people can see the divide of your writing ... the good, the bad and the ugly.

the fugly i try to sweep under the carpet

 

[Angeline]

i love that poem, the more i read it, the more i love it. the sounds, the pacing, the imagery

sigh

lubberly!

When I was starting college (so so long ago ) I took a survey poetry class that covered English literature from the Romantic poets to modern. So we started with Keats and Byron and finished with Philip Larkin and his contemporaries. And of course in between were writers like Yeats and Eliot. By the end of that class I felt like I had been dipped in the most wonderful chocolate. Repeatedly.

 

[butters]

When I was starting college (so so long ago ) I took a survey poetry class that covered English literature from the Romantic poets to modern. So we started with Keats and Byron and finished with Philip Larkin and his contemporaries. And of course in between were writers like Yeats and Eliot. By the end of that class I felt like I had been dipped in the most wonderful chocolate. Repeatedly.

i hope no one left you out in the sun too long

sounds wistfully lovely. i do regret not going to uni. sigh

 

[Angeline]

i hope no one left you out in the sun too long

sounds wistfully lovely. i do regret not going to uni. sigh

The only advantage is that you get the teachers as well as the books. Other than that it's probably not worth the money. Not that my kids believe me when I say that.

Mom says you can get an education at the library.

<Both kids roll eyes>

 

[butters]

The only advantage is that you get the teachers as well as the books. Other than that it's probably not worth the money. Not that my kids believe me when I say that.

Mom says you can get an education at the library.

<Both kids roll eyes>

ha a library is an education in itself ... all that knowledge. a museum of thoughts, a procession of inspiration and a font of creativity!

and i can ever get my free orange recycling sacks from there, too.


anyways, i'm off to watch tv in bed while this gets taken over by no.3 son. nite all

 

[Palba_Noruda]

When outside doesn't connect with inside ...

do you feel like you've cheated when writing a poem?

is it a bit like faking an O?

does it matter?

if it matters, to whom does it matter? the reader, or only the author?

i admit to having sometimes written pieces that end up to me as no more than nice/clever/witty arrangements of words on a screen. i've even had lots of praise for these and end up feeling a big ol' cheat because they've either begun as not meaning anything to me, or once did but got revised out of any semblance of what they began as. i end up feeling totally divorced from them and I know, if no one else does, that they're missing that element that - for me - is pretty damned important to my own integrity as a writer.

So if others get pleasure from reading these pieces we no longer feel in any way attached to, does it matter?

I suppose if you wanted to take a zen approach to the question, you might consider that it's quite impossible for the outside not to correlate perfectly to the inside.

Just as a thought experiment, for example, if there is a continuum of electrochemical energy, the inside of a person, the skin, the air, everything else, the poem is simply a byproduct of bazillions of shaking little atoms and all that shit and never could really have been anything else ... Excuse me if that sounds a little like the Matrix or some argument for destiny... But well, I never had any problem with the concept of destiny. Ha!

According to this train of thought, the feeling of dis-satisfaction within the poet is just a byproduct of the process. Over time it changes to something else.

***

Some people divorce themselves from the interpretation of their poem once it's written. The poem can't be misinterpreted. They'd only feel like they cheated themselves, because the reader's reaction is irrelevant to how they feel about what they've written.

Most write poems intending them to be interpreted in fairly narrow way. If someone interprets something else they can't just run with it and say, "Yes, I see that too." But that's lazy, they know they've failed.

The biggest cheaters just write what seems like a poem so people will pat their backs. They don't care about communicating anything besides for how wonderful they are as a poet. Everyone is probably lazy like that once in a while. There are poems where you might intend the sound to be more important than meaning. I'm undecided on those poems.

I think there is a tradition of fun rhetorical and poetic "showing off" in the history of poetry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fu_(poetry)
Fu (Chinese: 賦 "Descriptive poem") is a kind of prose-poem popular in ancient China, especially during the Han Dynasty. During the Han Dynasty, the Chu Ci-type of lyrics evolved into fu. It is a type of prose-poem with introductory, concluding, or other interspersed passages that are in prose, typically in the form of questions and answers. The fu is usually called rhapsody in English, but has also been called "rhyme-prose," "exposition," and sometimes "poetical essay."

A Han fu is typically very long, describes a subject exhaustively from every possible angle, and is usually meant to display the poet's rhetorical and lexical skill rather than express personal feeling.

Kind of like when jazz guys would cut each other at jam sessions, eh? People trying to one-up each other?

I was reading a book on pre-history and the author made a snide little comment about some doodles some pre-historic people had made. The author claimed they were worthless and weren't expressive at all.

It seems to me even doodles are expressive. We know somebody was standing in that cave, charcoal in hand, drawing on that wall. To me that is profoundly expressive. A person existed!

Poetry obviously can communicate in a unique way, but how do we explain the meaning we get out of works that no poet made? A forest? A childhood toy? A town where we once lived? A place we visit for spiritual sustenance? A special stone or souvenir? People find meaning in all kinds of different things in all kinds of unexpected ways it seems to me.

And even if a person is writing something just to be a show-off or just to have a little fun with the language or just to challenge themselves or just to give themselves something to do, it's hard to escape expressiveness. Write enough, follow form enough, and over time you will find that you are expressing yourself even if you are not trying to. It seems quite impossible to escape the self and the experiences one has had.

 

[EroticOrogeny]

When I've finished a poem I have my own perceptions of how well it came out as I envisioned. Perhaps at some point I should go back and revise some, but ts simpler to keep moving on.
I got quite a bit for my lit classes at University. Nothing I can put my hands on now, but its there. Can learn a lot from the library too, but these days can find a lot online instead. It was so much easier to donwload a PDF of an article rather than fetch from the stacks and Xerox, with the lost color and often distortions near the middle edges of the pages. My son has learned a lot not only from books but also online.