on 20/2/06 4:26 pm, Bob Cooper at [log in to unmask] wrote:
> Matt writes:
> "to open up another discussion point, what has been everybody's experiences
> of writing poem sequences like this?"
> and he goes on: "As well as the discipline that James mentions, it must
> offer an opportunity to allow poems to work off each other, but I suppose it
> carries its own risks, such as repetition. I ask because I've been working
> on a series of linked poems and prose pieces about a very obscure historical
> character, and have found it both more difficult than writing 'occasional'
> poems, but also more rewarding in many ways. I'd be interested to hear
> people's thoughts."
>
> Hi Matt (and all else who're reading this),
>
> I, too, find myself wanting to write poems that are in a series. I find,
> however, I'm not too disciplined in how I approach it. I don't, for
> instance, map out the issues/themes/topics I feel important to cover in the
> series, I just write one and then another - then put them in a possible
> order and start wondering about how to fill in the gaps!
> I guess, because we're conditioned to read and write short poems - and the
> long poem has fallen from favour - narrative poetry, as a genre, needs
> sequences or series of poems.
> I wonder, sometimes, about the attention span of readers of poetry. Perhaps
> that's why I feel happier reading a series of short, self-contained, poems
> that have subtle links, and underlying impressions that rise to the surface
> when I discover them, but I'm daunted when faced with a poem that goes on
> for pages and pages. However...
> It could be that short poems are like nibbling chocolate, or eating oranges
> (for rhyming poems) or plums(from the icebox in the fridge), whereas a
> series of poems is like a 5 course meal with lots of things in each course,
> and a fine wine or two (and even with sherry before and port - or a really
> good Malt! - afterwards!).
> Bob
|