Hi Deborah,
I think you're making a good point here. One that I agree with! But I'm also
wanting to agree with what Carl's saying too.
I mean I like the way you continue what you're saying: "Why shouldn't poetry
be the same as any art form, and in this case, real life?" and that's the
question I struggle with in all kinds of ways.
In the end I guess I'd have to be dismantled and re-assembled - but still as
a person with ears, eyes, and a mouth - if I didn't see that the difference
between art and real life is often just the frame... BUT it's also what's
selected to go inside the frame. I know I use the word "frame" when I'm
wanting to say a computer screen, a sheet of paper, (for a poem!) and I also
recognise that some "installations" have rather loose boundaries or frames
(and video art can involve unwitting participants etc) but it's the decision
to select what is (and what isn't) part of the work of art that is one of
the ways it's made.
(I know there's all sorts of ways this arguement can be dismantled, but with
poetry... I feel I've got to get what's on the page - in the frame - to work
as good as I can get it to work. I used to have a phrase "precise
ambiguities" to try and describe the ways I wanted people to see through
particular things I was trying to present in words)
Bob
>From: Deborah Russell <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Pennine Poetry Works <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Delicate Pastel - Carl
>Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 00:04:04 -0400
>
>"A painting requires a little mystery, some vagueness, some fantasy. When
>you always make your meaning perfectly plain you end up boring
>people"...conversations are made up of fragments of information,
>half-finished sentences, and unanswered questions. Why shouldn't painting
>be
>as well?" Edgar Degas
>
>
>Why shouldn't poetry be the same as any art form, and in this case, real
>life?
>
>- Deborah
>
>*****************
>I would suggest for a poem that capitalizes on deliberate vagueness that
>any unnecessary vagueness be removed. For example, why do our dreams
>have to be "something" shining? Why so repulsive "and more..."? Why so
>dead "somewhere"? Why "something" so difficult as this? What do you
>really gain by using words that convey nothing to the reader? Customary
>expressions like "to have and to hold" are also a non-encounter. I would
>say, give the reader something fresh, original, sparkling, specific.
>Leave only impressions if you wish, but do so through specific ideas. An
>Impressionist painting is made up of discrete dots....
>
>I found "until finite tics announce we are one" to be rather
>unfortunate. I pictured shoulders jerking, etc.
>
>It is clear that you seek a style that ignores grammatical conventions,
>and there is professional success available for such poetry. But, I
>don't think such poetry is a sufficient challenge to the writer. It's
>rather like the sculptor who makes a nothing and presents it for view
>saying, in effect, "You figure it out." Rules are freeing, not
>constraining.
>
>Carl
>==============
>Delicate Pastel
>...
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
_________________________________________________________________
Use MSN Messenger to send music and pics to your friends
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger
|
