JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for POETRYETC Archives


POETRYETC Archives

POETRYETC Archives


POETRYETC@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

POETRYETC Home

POETRYETC Home

POETRYETC  2003

POETRYETC 2003

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Poetry & Psych

From:

Rebecca Seiferle <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Poetryetc provides a venue for a dialogue relating to poetry and poetics <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:49:33 -0600

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (247 lines)

Hi Tom,

When you write:
"Psychological progress is often made through failing to prove hypothesesand
there is a possibility that the happy poets who killed themselves were
bipolar as opposed to just depressed.  Again it's the focus on the self
through ups and downs that seems to matter in the actual act of suicide
rather than going on being happy or unhappy."

This seems to me very general, and while the study notes that
there is "retrospective evidence to suggest that many suicidal
poets have suffered from some form of depressive disorder
throughout their lives" and goes on to note "among the 83 poets
noted by Jamison to suffer from cyclothymia, bipolar, or
major depressive illness, only 25% committed suicide," the focus
of the study goes on to "isolate which themes or linguistic
features may predict future suicide attempts." So what
it has to offer that is new is this linguistic approach which
is proposed as diagnostic. Being bipolar or having depressive
illness as well as the various psychologies or life situations
of the poets involved is not at issue in the hypothesis. As the
methods state "Presence of mental illness...was not a factor...
thus differences between the suicidal and control poets are more
likely associated with suicide than mental illness."

 And, yes, it's
true as you say that progress can be made, and not just in
the field of psychology, by a failed hypothesis, but usually
the failure of the hypothesis has to be acknowledged, and it
isn't in this particular study, which instead draws a conclusion
of what "may" be or "might be" significant as it hangs upon
the one remaining thread, the greater presence of self-referencing
in suicidal poets while the greater presence of everything
else (which disproves the hypothesis) is ignored.

Also, when this study is compared with
"Lying Words," different  assumptions operate; in that
study "liars show lower cognitive complexity, used fewer
self-references and other-references, and used more negative
emotion words." Some of these are similar to the hypothesis
advanced about "the suicidal group of poets," that they'll
use more negative emotion words, fewer other-references
(communication). And I suppose some relationship could be
seen between "lower cognitive complexity" and "social
disengagement." I can't help but notice the
inverse relationship on self-references, that liars
will have fewer of them, and suicidal poets will have more.
And since these are psychological studies, I would assume
their focus is mental health, and one study seems to assume
that liars show their lack of mental health by the lack of self-
referencing and the other that suicidal poets show their lack
of mental health by self-referencing. I wonder what Plato would
say?

Well, if you like, you can pass my comments on. Frankly,
I would hate to see anything like this used as a diagnostic
tool. And while even a failed hypothesis might be useful,
many who conduct studies don't like them and try to rescue
as much of the hypothesis as possible. For instance, this
study acknowledges that "it is premature to fingerprint
suicide potential by use of a text analysis approach" but
goes on to say "configurations of language in poetry might
be predictors of suicide." And in most of the poets grouped
into the suicide group, there were all sorts of more obvious
predictors, attempts, threats, statements, not to mention
the obvious difficulties of their lives, more than enough
to pay attention to, if anyone had.

Best,

Rebecca

Rebecca Seiferle
www.thedrunkenboat.com
-------Original Message-------
From: tom bell <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 08/16/03 10:11 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Poetry & Psych

>
> Psychological progress is often made through failing to prove hypothesesand
there is a possibility that the happy poets who killed themselves were
bipolar as opposed to just depressed.  Again it's the focus on the self
through ups and downs that seems to matter in the actual act of suicide
rather than going on being happy or unhappy.

again if you like I can pass this along to him.  I know he'll be glad some
literary people actually read it.  His comment to me awhile back was that
when he talked to lit people about it where he worked their comment was
"we
don't like to read that stuff in our field.  We only read _______
journals."

tom

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rebecca Seiferle" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 9:28 PM
Subject: Re: Poetry & Psych


> Alison Croggon wrote: It ignores the
> self-gratifying annihilation of self that writing offers in its
> aesthetic considerations, say.  Hmmm.
>
> Hmmm is right, "self-gratifying annihilation of self?" haha
>
> I read a bunch of these too, The Secret Life of Pronouns,
> Word Use in the Poetry of Suicidal and Nonsuicidal Poets,
> Lying Words, and the one you mention about the repression
> of trauma damaging the immune system, and found it interesting
> if not entirely persuasive.
>
> I had to wonder why in "The Secret Life of Pronouns," the most
> significant measure of increasing health is a change of style
> in pronoun usage, and in "Lying Words," a primary indicator
> of truthfulness is the use of the first person pronoun, whereas
> the use of the first person pronoun is hypothesized as
> part of the disengagement of the suicidal poet.
>
> I also noticed that in the conclusions for this paper on
> the suicidal and nonsuicidal poet, nothing was said
> about the higher means of terms of "positive emotions" among
> the suicidal poets, which are 3.3 early, 3.1 middle, and 3.9
> later. Whereas the control, and nonsuicidal group of poets,
> was 2.3 early, 2.9 in middle, 2.5 late. Which indicates
> that suicidal poets have a  higher rate of terms of "positive
> emotion (happy, love) and may just get happier and happier. Whereas
> the control group seems to decline somewhat. Though it was
> noted that the suicidal poets had a higher usage of sexual words
> throughout their writing. Which in a weird sort of way might
> suggest that due to their increased use of the first person,
> the suicidal poets are not liars (since in "Lying Words"
> "liars used first-person pronouns at a lower rate than
> truth-tellers), that they express more positive emotion,
> happiness and love, and that this increases as they go,
> more terms of "communication (talk, share)" and more sexual
> words throughout their writing lives. Well, is it any wonder
> the poor fools do themselves in?
>
> Well, seriously, this paper "hypothesized that there would be
> an increase in hopelessness words and in references to the
> self and a decrease in positive emotion words and references
> to communications with others in the later periods of the poets'
> careers." In the hopelessness words, there was a continuing
> decrease from 2.2 to 1.8 to 1.7. The positive emotion words
> increased as I noted above. The references to the self remained
> the same as 4.0 in the early and later work, with a dip in
> the middle. And only the references to communications with
> others declined, from 1.2 to 1.0. Three out of four of
> the elements of the hypothesis were contradicted by the study's
> own data. Also the conclusions at one point seem simply in
> error, "Additionally, the use of the first-person plural, which
> might indicate an awareness of and an integration in social
> and personal relationships, was lower in the suicide group's
> poetry than it was in that of the nonsuicide group." But
> Table 1 shows for the use "We (us, our) for the suicide
> group .73, 1.3, and .85, and for the control group, .69,
> .40, and 1.1.  It's only lower in later usage, and if that
> is significant, I wonder what to make of that .40 among
> the "socially integrated" nonsuicidal group.
>
> When the authors begin the conclusion "the results indicate
> that certain features may be associated with suicide,"
> _may_ seems to be the operative word here. Particularly
> for a study that failed to prove three out of four
> of the elements of its hypothesis.
>
> Best,
>
> Rebecca
>
> Rebecca Seiferle
> www.thedrunkenboat.com
>
>
>
> -------Original Message-------
> From: Alison Croggon <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: 08/17/03 10:19 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Poetry & Psych
>
> >
> > At 2:56 PM -0500 16/8/03, tom bell wrote:>here's an url for a pdf
>
version
>
>http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homepage/faculty/Pennebaker/Reprints/Suicida
l
> >Poets.PDF
> >
> >but you'll probably need to cut and paste it in your browser?
>
> The end of the url might have fallen off - I had to reinstate an "htm"
>
> Well, I've downloaded a few of the essays, and I am really not at all
> sure that this kind of investigation really pertains to imaginative
> writing.  I have long known that repressing trauma rather than
> expressing it leads to depressing the immune system, and that also
> the entering of imaginative states may be as traumatic as the
> original episodes, and may exacerbate mental problems rather than
> solve them (who is it in the Bible who say that wisdom only leads to
> sadness?) I think most writers are very familiar with their own
> neuroses whether they choose to express them directly or not.  &c.
> And he just seems to be saying things like, well, poets who write
> about sad stuff are more likely to kill themselves... Also I don't
> know how you can do a linguistic analysis of Mandelstam and Pasternak
> in English, but there is no comment on studying the work in its
> original Russian.  I also downloaded his essay on truth-tellers and
> liars and their linguistic use, and wondered whether he would say
> fiction writers were truth tellers or liars.  Since of course good
> fiction writers are both.
>
> I actually have very little doubt that imaginative writing is a
> adaptive survival mechanism.  But there is a real problem in viewing
> it through therapeutic glasses.  Dr Pennebaker seems to be coming
> from the other end - that it helps people to write things down or
> otherwise express what troubles them - which is fine, but I think is
> of little use in analysing the phenomenon of writing and runs the
> risk of boxing it in issues of mental health.  It ignores the
> self-gratifying annihilation of self that writing offers in its
> aesthetic considerations, say.  Hmmm.
>
> A much more urgent and interesting relationship between trauma and
> language is outlined in Elizabeth Scarry's The Body in Pain - The
> Making and Unmaking of the World.
>
> Best
>
> A
> --
>
>
> Alison Croggon
>
> Blog
> http://alisoncroggon.blogspot.com
>
> Editor, Masthead
> http://au.geocities.com/masthead_2/
>
> Home page
> http://www.users.bigpond.com/acroggon/

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager