On 7/4/05, Andrew Burke <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Judy asked, >can a poet truly lose the Muse?
>
> Now, this Romantic concept of muse is amusing. I trot it out occasionally
> when I am in full egotistical, creative or randy flight, but I don't truly
> believe in it. It's one of those tidy concepts inherited from our
> forefathers&mothers to explain their exalted position above the rest of the
> tribe. The tribe's songs were considered, of course, museless, born merely
> of the wrack and fiddle of their everyday lives. Now 'wrack and fiddle' are
> the cornerstone of our poetic, both academic and tribal. Well, mostly. Some
> grandiose strutters try on an elevated tone, but stuff them.
. . .
>
>I believe the body has a lot to do with it - how fit you are. . . .
. Oh, some people create a
> forumula for their work and keep it going into old age through decades of
> unfitness - but they are merely echoing themselves. The public might buy it,
> even the academics, but true poets progress as they go ...
>
> Writing poetry is a physical thing, just as the brain is a muscle. Some
> attributes of life slow down with age - mainly due to our rotten
> lifestyles - so our impetus to write also suffers. . . .
& more & more distress -- because I am somewhat in agreement. When I
was well, writing was a very physical, and physically demandin,
practice.
So what now, when I can barely move without exhaustion???
--
~ SB =^..^=
http://www.sbpoet.com
http://sb.chatango.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sbmontana/
|