Hi Mike,
I'm joining in (almost too late - which seems to be the way things are with 
me these days!).
I feel that the discussion's been valuable in exploring the theory of how a 
poem becomes a poem, what makes a poem a poem, when what looks like a poem 
(and somehow sounds like a poem) may not be a poem.
I think your piece has a good subject - it seems to me that the discussion 
is about how the subject is approached. But poems are more than what they're 
about - they're also how the present what they're about (and that's what 
this thread seems to be about...)
And me?
I get the impression, from reading how you've phrased things, that I could 
be reading an account of the experience in a letter... It's not altogether 
"reported speech" but it isn't dramatic speech (and a poem is drama or it is 
nothing! - but I can't remember who first said that!).
It gets more dramatic in the last stanza, I feel more engaged, I feel the 
narrator is saying, "Hey, what I'm saying now interests me!" and I start to 
feel interested too...
I guess the utterly-most-difficult thing to do with any kind of writing is 
to write about something that's boring in an interesting way. But, in saying 
that I don't think you're saying "I was bored!" - but the flat, unengaged, 
tone isn't hooking me to what's going on.
Bob


>From: Helen Clare <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Pennine Poetry Works <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: hidden figures- Christina, Grasshopper, Annabelle, Gary, Sally
>Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:13:14 -0000
>
>I wish I could get into this discussion further, but its late and I'm tired
>so I'll be brief... but I hope somewhere along the line helpful.
>Somehow the language in this doesn't lift of the page and I think the
>problem has more to do with cadence than rhythm. The song of the line isn't
>singing.
>Helen
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Sally Evans <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 6:36 PM
>Subject: Re: hidden figures- Christina, Grasshopper, Annabelle, Gary, Sally
>
>
>Hi Mike,
>I dont know what the others will say, but I think the response of trying to
>defend this poem as it stands is mistaken (if brave). De dum de dum is
>certainly a rhythm but there is something wrong with the way it is used
>here. The poem from beginning to end is somehow flat.
>
>As I suspected, you say there was another figure "hidden" in the poem, but
>then it comes over more as a puzzle in verse than a poem. I believe
>something has gone wrong in the way you have tried to translate your idea 
>of
>a hidden fugure (suggested at or by the place you were visiting) into the
>poem. I would be interested in a complete re-write because I am trying to
>understand what made you write this at all, as I said before.
>
>As for what the different words and images mean, I think you can analyse a
>piece of writing like this but you cannot build up a meaningful piece of
>writing by collecting analytical particles and combining them.
>
>That would make poetry a science, which I don't think it is.
>bw
>SallyE
>
>The Hidden Figure
>
>We came to see the winter palace,
>just two among the thousands.
>We walked along the north facade,
>admired its thrusting columns.
>We observed the towers and turrets
>and the cupola on the roof,
>wandered through the garden
>with its fountains spouting spray.
>
>It was only when we entered
>that the guide began her story,
>how a legend from the distant past
>preserved the mystery
>of a hidden figure in the palace,
>some shape or symbol concealed
>in its design which the architect placed
>there but which had never been revealed.
>
>We mounted stairs by the dozen,
>looked at paintings, gazed in mirrors.
>We penetrated to the inner sanctum,
>according to our guide, and I´m sure we did.
>It was all quite stimulating
>but by the time we withdrew
>to the cafe for refreshments
>I was limp with exhaustion.
>
>A palace is just a place to live
>as far as I´m concerned. It´s house
>writ big, but still a house
>and I wouldn´t fancy paying the heating bill.
>I don´t believe in hidden figures,
>that legend´s just a con.
>At least that´s what I think.
>I can´t speak for my companion.
>
>on 13/11/03 9:13 am, Mike Horwood at [log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone,
> > Many thanks for your useful responses. This is a combined reply since 
>you
>all
> > raised similar points. Those points I´ve summarised as:
> > 1. not poetry, lack of rhythm
> > 2. what are you trying to say/what is this `poem´ about
> > There were other comments which focused on specific words or phrases or
>whole
> > stanzas which I will think over at leisure. I´d like here to pick up 
>these
>two
> > main reactions. Of course, in offering my own view of this odd piece I´m
>going
> > to be trying, at least to some extent, to defend the words and lineation 
>I
>had
> > chosen. I hope that won´t come across too much as if I think the final
>product
> > is good, I´m sure it isn´t. But half the fun of writing `poetry´ is
>arguing
> > about it, so here goes.
> >
> > 1. It´s certainly interesting, and eye opening, to see a poem written 
>out
>as
> > prose. The opening of Eliot´s Four Quartets look especially fine in that
>form.
> > I imagine that the prime effect is to highlight rhythm or the lack of 
>it.
> > There may be something wrong with my ear (like deafness, for instance 
>;-)
>but
> > in the opening stanza I hear quite a strong rhythm. It goes something 
>like
> > this; dee, dum, dee, dum, dee, dum, dee, dum / dee, dum, dee, dum dee,
>dum,
> > dee / There´s a little irregularity e.g.some lines have an extra 
>syllable
>and
> > the last three words of S1 break that `rhythm´ completely. S2 returns to
>the
> > original `rhythm´ for the first 2 lines after which the  lines run
>together in
> > much longer cadences. Rhythm isn´t only metrical, of course, as Eliot
>(again)
> > also pointed out it concerns sounds, words, imagery and the change from
>one
> > image to the next. Try reading the last three words of S1 with an
>energetic
> > forward thrust of the pelvis for each stress (I´m not sure I should be
>writing
> > this, but never mind) and see what it suggests. Rhythm at the very 
>least,
>I
> > hope.
> >
> > 2. The first point I shall make here concerns both content and rhythm,
>since
> > rhythm, as we have seen, includes sequences of images. Here is a 
>selection
>of
> > words and phrases from the piece; thrusting columns, towers and turrets,
> > fountains spouting spray, entered, mounted, penetrated, the inner 
>sanctum,
> > stimulating, withdrew, limp with exhaustion. Does this combination of
>words
> > suggest any particular subject? Would it have suggested one to Freud, 
>for
> > example?
> > One thing I was trying to do here was to weave various words and phrases
>into
> > the fabric of the `poem´ so that they might actually function as a kind 
>of
> > `hidden figure´ for the reader to identify as they read. The `poem´ then
> > enacts its own subject. What is the subject? What is the `winter 
>palace´?
> > Clearly not the one in St. Petersburg since that would have capital
>letters,
> > doesn´t have a garden and there are no fountains. My winter palace 
>exists
>only
> > in the text you read, the `hidden figure´ in the palace is the `hidden
>figure´
> > in the text. Pretty cunning, I think you will admit. As a final bonus 
>the
> > narrator, who is not me, just a narrator, is accompanied by...who? 
>Someone
>is
> > there, mentioned at the beginning, `we´ and `two´, and at the end `my
> > companion´. As readers we know nothing of this shadowy figures opinions
>about
> > the whole experience. (S)he is also a `hidden figure´. The style of the
>piece
> > is intended to imitate as close as my poor powers allow the tone of a
>speaking
> > voice since it is supposed to be a person speaking. It´s not `poetic´ in
>the
> > sense of being high-flown. I don´t think that would be appropriate. And
>there
> > are some jokes - `heating bill´(?)
> > I think that to try to use language in this way is one of the elements
>that
> > makes the difference between prose and poetry. Whether it succeeds is
>quite
> > another matter, of course.
> >
> > That concludes the case for the defence. Does it make any sense? Even a
>little
> > bit of sense would be reassuring. But please, don´t flatter me, if I´m
> > deceiving myself entirely as to the possible reading of this piece then
>let me
> > have it between the eyes, as a way of opening them, I mean ;-)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Best wishes,   Mike

_________________________________________________________________
Tired of 56k? Get a FREE BT Broadband connection 
http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/btbroadband