Board index » Word on the Street... » Release




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 375 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 10:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Stone's Bitch
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 6:41 am
Posts: 5867
Location: Providence, RI
Gender: Male
dscans wrote:
I work part time at this rehabilitation center for people with TBI, dementia, or psychotic behavior. There's so much gold there but I have to respect their privacy. So I've been working on a story based on my experiences. I'd like to share it but I don't want to post anything I might one day want to publish. Is there any way to privately share it with anyone interested in providing feedback?


Could you do it as a Google doc or something, and give people permission to view it?

_________________
"I wish that I believed in fate / I wish I didn't sleep so late"

"The real truth about it is: no one gets it right / The real truth about it is: we’re all supposed to try"


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 10:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Got Some
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 5:58 pm
Posts: 1259
Location: Western Masshole
Gender: Male
Simple Torture wrote:
dscans wrote:
I work part time at this rehabilitation center for people with TBI, dementia, or psychotic behavior. There's so much gold there but I have to respect their privacy. So I've been working on a story based on my experiences. I'd like to share it but I don't want to post anything I might one day want to publish. Is there any way to privately share it with anyone interested in providing feedback?


Could you do it as a Google doc or something, and give people permission to view it?

I'm pretty sure google docs are all open to the public to view.

_________________
Paul McCartney told me to never drop names.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 10:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Stone's Bitch
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 6:41 am
Posts: 5867
Location: Providence, RI
Gender: Male
dscans wrote:
Simple Torture wrote:
dscans wrote:
I work part time at this rehabilitation center for people with TBI, dementia, or psychotic behavior. There's so much gold there but I have to respect their privacy. So I've been working on a story based on my experiences. I'd like to share it but I don't want to post anything I might one day want to publish. Is there any way to privately share it with anyone interested in providing feedback?


Could you do it as a Google doc or something, and give people permission to view it?

I'm pretty sure google docs are all open to the public to view.


I don't think so; or, at least, not anymore. They've rebranded it "Drive" and when I go into my documents, they're listed as private and I can change the access status. Let's test it! PM me your e-mail address and I'll add you to one of my documents.

_________________
"I wish that I believed in fate / I wish I didn't sleep so late"

"The real truth about it is: no one gets it right / The real truth about it is: we’re all supposed to try"


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 1:22 am 
Offline
User avatar
Got Some
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 5:58 pm
Posts: 1259
Location: Western Masshole
Gender: Male
Simple Torture wrote:
dscans wrote:
Simple Torture wrote:
dscans wrote:
I work part time at this rehabilitation center for people with TBI, dementia, or psychotic behavior. There's so much gold there but I have to respect their privacy. So I've been working on a story based on my experiences. I'd like to share it but I don't want to post anything I might one day want to publish. Is there any way to privately share it with anyone interested in providing feedback?


Could you do it as a Google doc or something, and give people permission to view it?

I'm pretty sure google docs are all open to the public to view.


I don't think so; or, at least, not anymore. They've rebranded it "Drive" and when I go into my documents, they're listed as private and I can change the access status. Let's test it! PM me your e-mail address and I'll add you to one of my documents.

That's right! I even have the story saved in google drive right now. Pm on the way.

_________________
Paul McCartney told me to never drop names.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 3:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The Snowboy
 Profile

Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:53 pm
Posts: 11395
New poem sequence up here:

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news ... ull/125033


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 3:41 am 
Offline
User avatar
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:37 am
Posts: 2465
Location: A dark place
Harmless wrote:

Enjoyed this. Nice work.

_________________
Do you like crappy amateur photography? Check out my photo blog here.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:15 am 
Offline
User avatar
The Snowboy
 Profile

Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:53 pm
Posts: 11395
Cheers :thumbsup:


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Johnny Guitar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:34 pm
Posts: 175
Location: Pennsylvania
Gender: Male
On poetry:

I've been doing short work for some time now-- some flash and prose poetry-- and only dabbled in poetry from time to time. I find my poetry, upon setting it aside to revisit in later days/weeks, seems to have quite a short shelf life of relevance when presented to my inner critic. I've been wondering why, and if any other writers experience a similar phenomenon.

Recently I've been trying to commit a little more to poetry. I'm dealing with some hurdles in that area. I guess it's that my approach changes. I have read many times that the goal of poetry is to express something in a new way, and with the utmost economy. I find that rationale to be self-defeating because a thing can only be new once; once I start to become accustomed to my own personal approach and/or viewpoint, I change it up, and immediately get myself lost. If there was anything worth expressing in the poem in the first place-- an actual emotion, for example-- my own criticism smothers it. To combat this, I started making the emotion a tertiary thing, and started really focusing on imagery and wordplay and embedding as many meanings (through enjambments, etc.) as humanly possible. The results have been what I consider my most technically palatable work yet; the only problem is, I don't know what I've created. This ziggurat of pleasing words; does it mean anything? Is my soul in there somewhere?

I guess these are rhetorical questions. I am curious as to the way fellow writers/poets on this forum deal with doubt. How clear is your vision upon approaching a poem? How often does it unravel?

_________________
"Writing is easy. All you do is stare at a blank sheet of paper until drops of blood form on your forehead." -- Gene Fowler


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The Snowboy
 Profile

Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:53 pm
Posts: 11395
Your 'soul' doesn't have to be in a poem, as long as it's a good poem.

Knowing what is a good poem will come with time and practice. You only know by intuition when you've practiced knowing through skill and technique. I haven't read your work but it sounds like you're on your way there. Maybe the next step is to hold your techiques slightly at arms' length; you know some of them, by all means learn others, but what you really need is to become confident in your decisions.

Every time you change style, or want to try something new, it's a new learning curve, and there's a while before becoming comfortable with the new way. I don't like to stay in the same place for very long, people get bored with reading the same thing for too long, so I try to change it up. But that's why it's a while between books, because of course whenever you change the rules of the game, there's a period of time it takes to become comfortable with it. And even then, it might still terrify you.

My next chapbook I'm quite scared of. It's of a more experimental nature than the last one, so it might be complete shit. I've had a few trusted friends tell me it isn't but you never know. I'd know better if it was more plain lyrical stuff, but it isn't. It's most definitely hybrid work, bridging the gap between lyrical and fucked up/experimental/avant-garde.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:21 am 
Offline
User avatar
Johnny Guitar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:34 pm
Posts: 175
Location: Pennsylvania
Gender: Male
Harmless wrote:
Your 'soul' doesn't have to be in a poem, as long as it's a good poem.

Knowing what is a good poem will come with time and practice. You only know by intuition when you've practiced knowing through skill and technique. I haven't read your work but it sounds like you're on your way there. Maybe the next step is to hold your techiques slightly at arms' length; you know some of them, by all means learn others, but what you really need is to become confident in your decisions.

Every time you change style, or want to try something new, it's a new learning curve, and there's a while before becoming comfortable with the new way. I don't like to stay in the same place for very long, people get bored with reading the same thing for too long, so I try to change it up. But that's why it's a while between books, because of course whenever you change the rules of the game, there's a period of time it takes to become comfortable with it. And even then, it might still terrify you.

My next chapbook I'm quite scared of. It's of a more experimental nature than the last one, so it might be complete shit. I've had a few trusted friends tell me it isn't but you never know. I'd know better if it was more plain lyrical stuff, but it isn't. It's most definitely hybrid work, bridging the gap between lyrical and fucked up/experimental/avant-garde.



Thanks for the insights.

Use of the word "soul" is always a bit dicey. I don't necessarily think of it in that transcendant type of way, where you're supposed to like, understand the universe after reading a particular poem. I do think insight is important, and I often finding myself running through a mental checklist where I consider the poem's viability as both an artistic construction and some vessel of insight. I guess if I don't feel a little knotted-up over what I've done I don't feel I've done anything. I'm not sure what to make of that. I suppose struggle, in some sense, is a necessity...?

Confidince in decisions-- that's a good way to put things into perspective. I appreciate the exactness of that phrase.

When you say hybrid or avant garde for your next chapbook, what are you referring to? Something akin to language poetry, or more flarf-y?

_________________
"Writing is easy. All you do is stare at a blank sheet of paper until drops of blood form on your forehead." -- Gene Fowler


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:15 am 
Offline
User avatar
The Snowboy
 Profile

Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:53 pm
Posts: 11395
griffinxi wrote:
Harmless wrote:
Your 'soul' doesn't have to be in a poem, as long as it's a good poem.

Knowing what is a good poem will come with time and practice. You only know by intuition when you've practiced knowing through skill and technique. I haven't read your work but it sounds like you're on your way there. Maybe the next step is to hold your techiques slightly at arms' length; you know some of them, by all means learn others, but what you really need is to become confident in your decisions.

Every time you change style, or want to try something new, it's a new learning curve, and there's a while before becoming comfortable with the new way. I don't like to stay in the same place for very long, people get bored with reading the same thing for too long, so I try to change it up. But that's why it's a while between books, because of course whenever you change the rules of the game, there's a period of time it takes to become comfortable with it. And even then, it might still terrify you.

My next chapbook I'm quite scared of. It's of a more experimental nature than the last one, so it might be complete shit. I've had a few trusted friends tell me it isn't but you never know. I'd know better if it was more plain lyrical stuff, but it isn't. It's most definitely hybrid work, bridging the gap between lyrical and fucked up/experimental/avant-garde.



Thanks for the insights.

Use of the word "soul" is always a bit dicey. I don't necessarily think of it in that transcendant type of way, where you're supposed to like, understand the universe after reading a particular poem. I do think insight is important, and I often finding myself running through a mental checklist where I consider the poem's viability as both an artistic construction and some vessel of insight. I guess if I don't feel a little knotted-up over what I've done I don't feel I've done anything. I'm not sure what to make of that. I suppose struggle, in some sense, is a necessity...?
Confidince in decisions-- that's a good way to put things into perspective. I appreciate the exactness of that phrase.

When you say hybrid or avant garde for your next chapbook, what are you referring to? Something akin to language poetry, or more flarf-y?


Well, technically this one has been partly inspired by Larry Eigner and the Black Mountain movement, which is a few decades old now but which fascinates me. Charles Olson's 'Projective Verse' manifesto describes this way of writing: "composition by field", which has really interested me throughout putting it together.

But all that's rather faffy and academic. Basically I got to the point, after my last book, where I'd forgotten how to write poems and I'd lost confidence in the poem as a thing which was able to communicate 'perfectly'. There's this idea that the more you write, the more perfect your poems get, and if there's anything experimental about this new thing it's that I've done away with that theory.... even if just this once. It's been liberating but also really scary. So if there's meaning in this one, it's more fragmented, strange and spread around than anything I've written before. I'd say it's about process, trying out moves, seeing what works intuitively, than trying to sculpt a final product which stands up to the usual scrutiny.

Basically, it could be awful. I don't think it is, but I couldn't tell you why using all the usual answers.

Edit: I forgot to say, the bolded bit -- I think that's right. You know you've got a decent poem because (among so many other things, of course) there are interesting tensions there. In some poems those tensions might be balanced carefully, in other poems those tensions might be held more loosely... but in all good writing, script-writing, novels, even soap operas, conflict is the key. If the reader has to do some work to bring the meaning out of the poem, it's better. I feel like, if people aren't interested in poetry it's because they read a lot of amateur stuff which doesn't cause them to think at all. Or either that, or it gives up everything it's got in one sitting. Like junk food.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 12:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Johnny Guitar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:34 pm
Posts: 175
Location: Pennsylvania
Gender: Male
Harmless wrote:
griffinxi wrote:
Harmless wrote:
Your 'soul' doesn't have to be in a poem, as long as it's a good poem.

Knowing what is a good poem will come with time and practice. You only know by intuition when you've practiced knowing through skill and technique. I haven't read your work but it sounds like you're on your way there. Maybe the next step is to hold your techiques slightly at arms' length; you know some of them, by all means learn others, but what you really need is to become confident in your decisions.

Every time you change style, or want to try something new, it's a new learning curve, and there's a while before becoming comfortable with the new way. I don't like to stay in the same place for very long, people get bored with reading the same thing for too long, so I try to change it up. But that's why it's a while between books, because of course whenever you change the rules of the game, there's a period of time it takes to become comfortable with it. And even then, it might still terrify you.

My next chapbook I'm quite scared of. It's of a more experimental nature than the last one, so it might be complete shit. I've had a few trusted friends tell me it isn't but you never know. I'd know better if it was more plain lyrical stuff, but it isn't. It's most definitely hybrid work, bridging the gap between lyrical and fucked up/experimental/avant-garde.



Thanks for the insights.

Use of the word "soul" is always a bit dicey. I don't necessarily think of it in that transcendant type of way, where you're supposed to like, understand the universe after reading a particular poem. I do think insight is important, and I often finding myself running through a mental checklist where I consider the poem's viability as both an artistic construction and some vessel of insight. I guess if I don't feel a little knotted-up over what I've done I don't feel I've done anything. I'm not sure what to make of that. I suppose struggle, in some sense, is a necessity...?
Confidince in decisions-- that's a good way to put things into perspective. I appreciate the exactness of that phrase.

When you say hybrid or avant garde for your next chapbook, what are you referring to? Something akin to language poetry, or more flarf-y?


Well, technically this one has been partly inspired by Larry Eigner and the Black Mountain movement, which is a few decades old now but which fascinates me. Charles Olson's 'Projective Verse' manifesto describes this way of writing: "composition by field", which has really interested me throughout putting it together.

But all that's rather faffy and academic. Basically I got to the point, after my last book, where I'd forgotten how to write poems and I'd lost confidence in the poem as a thing which was able to communicate 'perfectly'. There's this idea that the more you write, the more perfect your poems get, and if there's anything experimental about this new thing it's that I've done away with that theory.... even if just this once. It's been liberating but also really scary. So if there's meaning in this one, it's more fragmented, strange and spread around than anything I've written before. I'd say it's about process, trying out moves, seeing what works intuitively, than trying to sculpt a final product which stands up to the usual scrutiny.

Basically, it could be awful. I don't think it is, but I couldn't tell you why using all the usual answers.

Edit: I forgot to say, the bolded bit -- I think that's right. You know you've got a decent poem because (among so many other things, of course) there are interesting tensions there. In some poems those tensions might be balanced carefully, in other poems those tensions might be held more loosely... but in all good writing, script-writing, novels, even soap operas, conflict is the key. If the reader has to do some work to bring the meaning out of the poem, it's better. I feel like, if people aren't interested in poetry it's because they read a lot of amateur stuff which doesn't cause them to think at all. Or either that, or it gives up everything it's got in one sitting. Like junk food.


"Composition by field" may be a phrase I've encountered at some point and forgotten, or a phrase I never really understood. I just Googled it to learn a little more. I am comforted that it seems to describe an approach I've started to favor through instinct, though certainly not mastered. I have made conscious efforts to remove simile from my work, for example, and focus more on individual phrase units. I don't understand the somewhat obscure "breath" aspect of what they're talking about w/ this movement, but there seems to be a general sense of shedding form in favor of the music/delivery of language. I think your "fragmentary" approach sounds interesting, and if it's scary, it's probably valuable. I've done a lot of bizarre things in the hopes of shaking things up. I'm just wondering about construction; in your latest approach, what lights the fire? What tactic do you take to fan the flame?

You use the word "communicate" -- that's interesting. I've never regarded poetry (at least from the standpoint of the poet) as a means to communicate. As you mention, the well has been poisoned by non-thinking poetry; I feel like poets sometimes are writing exclusively for one another. The market is small. The audience is miniscule. But it is no less thrilling. If you could take the meaning of words away, poetry would still be a viable art form. The meanings of words enrich the experience, but I'm not always so sure those meanings need to be primary.

_________________
"Writing is easy. All you do is stare at a blank sheet of paper until drops of blood form on your forehead." -- Gene Fowler


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 3:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The Snowboy
 Profile

Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:53 pm
Posts: 11395
griffinxi wrote:
Harmless wrote:
griffinxi wrote:
Harmless wrote:
Your 'soul' doesn't have to be in a poem, as long as it's a good poem.

Knowing what is a good poem will come with time and practice. You only know by intuition when you've practiced knowing through skill and technique. I haven't read your work but it sounds like you're on your way there. Maybe the next step is to hold your techiques slightly at arms' length; you know some of them, by all means learn others, but what you really need is to become confident in your decisions.

Every time you change style, or want to try something new, it's a new learning curve, and there's a while before becoming comfortable with the new way. I don't like to stay in the same place for very long, people get bored with reading the same thing for too long, so I try to change it up. But that's why it's a while between books, because of course whenever you change the rules of the game, there's a period of time it takes to become comfortable with it. And even then, it might still terrify you.

My next chapbook I'm quite scared of. It's of a more experimental nature than the last one, so it might be complete shit. I've had a few trusted friends tell me it isn't but you never know. I'd know better if it was more plain lyrical stuff, but it isn't. It's most definitely hybrid work, bridging the gap between lyrical and fucked up/experimental/avant-garde.



Thanks for the insights.

Use of the word "soul" is always a bit dicey. I don't necessarily think of it in that transcendant type of way, where you're supposed to like, understand the universe after reading a particular poem. I do think insight is important, and I often finding myself running through a mental checklist where I consider the poem's viability as both an artistic construction and some vessel of insight. I guess if I don't feel a little knotted-up over what I've done I don't feel I've done anything. I'm not sure what to make of that. I suppose struggle, in some sense, is a necessity...?
Confidince in decisions-- that's a good way to put things into perspective. I appreciate the exactness of that phrase.

When you say hybrid or avant garde for your next chapbook, what are you referring to? Something akin to language poetry, or more flarf-y?


Well, technically this one has been partly inspired by Larry Eigner and the Black Mountain movement, which is a few decades old now but which fascinates me. Charles Olson's 'Projective Verse' manifesto describes this way of writing: "composition by field", which has really interested me throughout putting it together.

But all that's rather faffy and academic. Basically I got to the point, after my last book, where I'd forgotten how to write poems and I'd lost confidence in the poem as a thing which was able to communicate 'perfectly'. There's this idea that the more you write, the more perfect your poems get, and if there's anything experimental about this new thing it's that I've done away with that theory.... even if just this once. It's been liberating but also really scary. So if there's meaning in this one, it's more fragmented, strange and spread around than anything I've written before. I'd say it's about process, trying out moves, seeing what works intuitively, than trying to sculpt a final product which stands up to the usual scrutiny.

Basically, it could be awful. I don't think it is, but I couldn't tell you why using all the usual answers.

Edit: I forgot to say, the bolded bit -- I think that's right. You know you've got a decent poem because (among so many other things, of course) there are interesting tensions there. In some poems those tensions might be balanced carefully, in other poems those tensions might be held more loosely... but in all good writing, script-writing, novels, even soap operas, conflict is the key. If the reader has to do some work to bring the meaning out of the poem, it's better. I feel like, if people aren't interested in poetry it's because they read a lot of amateur stuff which doesn't cause them to think at all. Or either that, or it gives up everything it's got in one sitting. Like junk food.


"Composition by field" may be a phrase I've encountered at some point and forgotten, or a phrase I never really understood. I just Googled it to learn a little more. I am comforted that it seems to describe an approach I've started to favor through instinct, though certainly not mastered. I have made conscious efforts to remove simile from my work, for example, and focus more on individual phrase units. I don't understand the somewhat obscure "breath" aspect of what they're talking about w/ this movement, but there seems to be a general sense of shedding form in favor of the music/delivery of language. I think your "fragmentary" approach sounds interesting, and if it's scary, it's probably valuable. I've done a lot of bizarre things in the hopes of shaking things up. I'm just wondering about construction; in your latest approach, what lights the fire? What tactic do you take to fan the flame?

You use the word "communicate" -- that's interesting. I've never regarded poetry (at least from the standpoint of the poet) as a means to communicate. As you mention, the well has been poisoned by non-thinking poetry; I feel like poets sometimes are writing exclusively for one another. The market is small. The audience is miniscule. But it is no less thrilling. If you could take the meaning of words away, poetry would still be a viable art form. The meanings of words enrich the experience, but I'm not always so sure those meanings need to be primary.


Don't worry, I'm not an expert on Olson or Field Composition either; I've picked up what I know from reading a lot of Eigner and studying how he applied the theory in his work; you can't really know theory very well, imo, until you've looked at exactly how it works in the poem. What's the point of a bunch of techniques if you can't see them *working* in the thing you're meant to get excited by? Larry Eigner was awesome, and thinking of his Cerebral Palsy is the key to unlocking his take on Olson's manifesto.

'Tactic'? Not sure what you mean, or 'fan the flame', but if you mean inspiration... well, I'm not sure if I believe in inspiration at all. It takes work to find something to inspire, you look for it. And then it takes more work to turn everything that fires off in your brain into something that looks good as a piece of writing. Nothing comes to me fully formed. So I had these poems, some of which weren't going into a direction I was happy with; I thought they had potential but they weren't working in the traditional / mainstream way so I went further afield (pun intended) to figure out a way of 'finishing' them. The Black Mountain poets aren't new as an experimental movement, so I might not be writing groundbreaking poetry, however weird it is, but that doesn't bother me too much.

Looking for 'the meaning' of a poem is almost a pointless exercise. A good poem has meaning like a cake has flour. You can't 'look for the flour' in a baked cake, and there isn't just one grain. But that's waffle. Basically I think any kind of writing is communication, even if that communication happens in the subconscious. If I smack you in the face, I haven't communicated words but I have told you something. T.S. Eliot said "Genuine poetry can communicate before it is understood". I believe that. I think that the argument that nobody's reading poetry isn't quite true. Normally the people complaining about that are merely complaining that nobody reads their own poetry. There's a counter-argument, which says that poetry has a niche audience. But that doesn't have to be a bad thing; rock climbing, or competitive eating, also has a niche audience. There's no point bowing to a reader who hates poetry; you may as well blow the socks off someone who likes it. People enjoy poetry because it can communicate huge amounts of meaning in a tiny package, unlike most prose. In prose, you're looking for the meaning and you can find it because it is mostly unambiguous and focussed towards one meaning and message.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 3:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The Snowboy
 Profile

Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:53 pm
Posts: 11395
Basically, if a writer (any writer) is not trying to communicate, what's the point? Why should a reader care?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 4:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Johnny Guitar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:34 pm
Posts: 175
Location: Pennsylvania
Gender: Male
Harmless wrote:
Basically, if a writer (any writer) is not trying to communicate, what's the point? Why should a reader care?


I think I am being careless with my use of the word "communicate." I agree, writing is in essence communication. I guess in my mind I am making divisions amongst the many levels of communication (conscious vs. subconscious, as you mention). Self-communication is also a consideration. I am intrigued by the nearly infinite ways you can express yourself, and the existentialism therein. If I write a poem that is never read, I'd argue that it's still a poem, and it still has value. Its potential for communication, however, comes into question. Art in a vacuum I guess. I suppose that is why I am hyper-aware of my own relationship to my work.

When I say "the audience is miniscule," that's just me being jaded. I know there's an audience because I'm in it.

_________________
"Writing is easy. All you do is stare at a blank sheet of paper until drops of blood form on your forehead." -- Gene Fowler


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 4:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Yeah Yeah Yeah
 Profile

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:51 am
Posts: 4009
Location: S. Florida
Gender: Female
griffinxi wrote:
On poetry:

I've been doing short work for some time now-- some flash and prose poetry-- and only dabbled in poetry from time to time. I find my poetry, upon setting it aside to revisit in later days/weeks, seems to have quite a short shelf life of relevance when presented to my inner critic. I've been wondering why, and if any other writers experience a similar phenomenon.

Recently I've been trying to commit a little more to poetry. I'm dealing with some hurdles in that area. I guess it's that my approach changes. I have read many times that the goal of poetry is to express something in a new way, and with the utmost economy. I find that rationale to be self-defeating because a thing can only be new once; once I start to become accustomed to my own personal approach and/or viewpoint, I change it up, and immediately get myself lost. If there was anything worth expressing in the poem in the first place-- an actual emotion, for example-- my own criticism smothers it. To combat this, I started making the emotion a tertiary thing, and started really focusing on imagery and wordplay and embedding as many meanings (through enjambments, etc.) as humanly possible. The results have been what I consider my most technically palatable work yet; the only problem is, I don't know what I've created. This ziggurat of pleasing words; does it mean anything? Is my soul in there somewhere?

I guess these are rhetorical questions. I am curious as to the way fellow writers/poets on this forum deal with doubt. How clear is your vision upon approaching a poem? How often does it unravel?


The best poems are those that evoke some type of feeling, no matter HOW its done. Poems should "hit" ya, somehow.
I can't believe the enjoyment I now get from reading poems.
and writing them too.

Everybody's hesitant to post their poems here because then they can't be published elsewhere. Well, I mean Harmless and Mickey, but they are accomplished publishees.

I would be glad to read one of your poems if you want to post it or PM.

I'm not a critic, but I do enjoy reading

_________________
Can you feel the magic?
Oh, yeah


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 4:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The Snowboy
 Profile

Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:53 pm
Posts: 11395
Well, I have a link a few posts up to a long poem in The Morning Star. And you know, I have other stuff you can Google (with my real name, obvs. Mark Burnhope). There's plenty enough stuff around the Internet, but yeah, I don't want to post stuff here; it's kind of like posting a naked picture to Facebook for your boss to find. Most publishers won't take a poem if you've already given it away free. Some don't mind, but you're limiting yourself.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 4:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Johnny Guitar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:34 pm
Posts: 175
Location: Pennsylvania
Gender: Male
Harmless wrote:
Well, I have a link a few posts up to a long poem in The Morning Star.


Today is the first day that link worked for me. Love this.

_________________
"Writing is easy. All you do is stare at a blank sheet of paper until drops of blood form on your forehead." -- Gene Fowler


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 5:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The Snowboy
 Profile

Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:53 pm
Posts: 11395
griffinxi wrote:
Harmless wrote:
Well, I have a link a few posts up to a long poem in The Morning Star.


Today is the first day that link worked for me. Love this.


:thumbsup:

It's the longest thing I've ever written that I thought was successful.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Writing in general
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 8:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Johnny Guitar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:34 pm
Posts: 175
Location: Pennsylvania
Gender: Male
knee tunes wrote:

The best poems are those that evoke some type of feeling, no matter HOW its done. Poems should "hit" ya, somehow.
I can't believe the enjoyment I now get from reading poems.
and writing them too.

Everybody's hesitant to post their poems here because then they can't be published elsewhere. Well, I mean Harmless and Mickey, but they are accomplished publishees.

I would be glad to read one of your poems if you want to post it or PM.

I'm not a critic, but I do enjoy reading


I won't post any unpublished poetry here, but here's one short of mine for interested parties:

http://www.juked.com/2006/09/temper.asp

_________________
"Writing is easy. All you do is stare at a blank sheet of paper until drops of blood form on your forehead." -- Gene Fowler


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 375 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next

Board index » Word on the Street... » Release


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
It is currently Mon Dec 11, 2017 12:38 am