I didn't complete the previous response, but anyhow, I'll move on from
it. This one is interesting enough.


On 10/13/06, kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> "I guess it depends on the purpose of "language", and thereby writing
> itself, though not just writing, but art as a whole. I use it as a
> container of experience. And therefore all I care is that it's clear
> and accurate. To use the visual arts that you cited, you could perhaps
> think of it as a snapshot, a photo of some sort. You see a something
> that you'd like to document, you take its photo. Except that words
> have a facility for describing less tangible thing, like
> relationships, thoughts and feelings."
>
> this is a good summation of your motives with writing, thanks for that.
> interestingly though, I have to say that this is also the way I view
> (my) poetry. a container for experience, or of _the senses_
> ('sensation'). I've long read/written/studied haiku, & this attitude
> of experience of everything that surrounds us is conveyed in that
> artform in a degree that makes it very nearly spiritual, but as rooted
> to consciousness/personality/reality as is possible in language.
> that's the sort of energy I try to use when I write; whether it's
> haiku or poems (a differentiation).
> the question I asked wasn't about your appoach towards poetry, really,
> but about your approach to experience of it, & of the role of poetic
> language, poetic integrity & poetic Quality. all of which concern the
> desire of a writer to share his or her work, or not share it.
>
> I can certainly comprehend the idea that someone writes only for the
> pleasure of writing, of documenting something & then discarding it, as
> it were. a friend of mine actually does that literally; he writes
> short stories, by hand because he doesn't have a computer, but
> recently threw out all of his papers because he moved into a new
> apartment & (a) didn't want to haul them over & (b) didn't think they
> were as good as they might have been. I asked in bewilderment whether
> he'd ever heard of editing, & I've yet to really understand the way he
> writes. just because I don't understand the way someone who never
> shares their work uses language, doesn't mean I can't respect it. :)
> the big qualm I have with 'writing for oneself' is that there is no
> 'quality control' beyond the writer's own discipline, which can only
> be lax as it is only himself that he needs to please. the reason this
> is a qualm (I like that word) is that for me writing is sometimes
> called "the craft" because I believe in Quality. perhaps it can be
> called integrity as mentioned, or skill, or power, or intactness, or
> fullness, &c. but without outside response & influence, I can't
> imagine a writer being able to both care about & control said Quality.
>
> these are terribly theoretical issues, & it's always hard to grasp
> someone else's differing point of view (!) with something like
> artistic creation; probably because points of view on these things are
> hard to convey as it is!
>
> K       S
>

I won't comment on your friend because I don't know about what he does.

I wrote a long reply but decided a different, shorter one might be beter.

There are 3 things to consider here

1- taste
2- craft
3- art

Let's not mix them up.

Let's use the visual arts as an example.

Craft in photography is how to operate the camera. You need to know
enough of it, but you don't need to geek out on every camera and lens
and flash out there and their every little mechanical detail. When
someone too crafty goes out shooting he lugs too much equipment that
he doesn't really need, sometimes doesn't shut up about it, and looks
at your equipment with derision. In poetry, you notice it sometimes in
people who fill in their pieces with big needless words. They seem to
try to impress with their vocabulary. Sometimes you might see in a
single poem about a common enough topic too many words that you hadn't
actually heard anyone use for months or years, yet they're all there,
in just one piece. You can't remember the last time you needed to use
a dictionary yet here in a poem about an every day topic you need to
use it a few times. If it's a technique like using imagery, then you
sometimes see way friggin too many imagery in their poems. Perhaps one
image every line or even perhaps sometimes two or three per line; what
a slug it is to read their stuff, and what headache for the reader.

Then let's talk about taste and art and the difference between them.
Taste is simply what you like. You could like something or hate it,
and there's no accounting for taste.

Art though, is a whole different thing. Art is whether you can
actually take a good picture with the camera you got. Some people take
amazing pictures, one after another, with cheap cameras. Why? They're
just artistically literate. Art hasn't changed much in its basics for
a long time, and art is universal; be it visual, text, or sound. It's
written. It's in libraries. The basics of it can be read in a week,,
but the practice can take a lifetime.

Now, this is a sad truth. Most people are artistically illiterate and
don't care to be. Most peoplel fail to recognise good art. They follow
their taste, and their taste is artistically illitearte. You don't
need such people telling you what they think; their advice is bad.
They're the type that buy all those trash popular cultures items.
Poetry is sure to be like any other human interest; lots of uneducated
tastes, lots of craft junkies, and very, very few artists.

It's possible that something might not meet your interest yet you
recognise its art and deeply admire it.

Art has many "elements of design" to it like completeness, elegance,
balance, contrast, repetition, emphasis and so on. It's about what's
true and beautiful. You could learn art through drawing and apply it
to poetry, or vice versa; art is universal.

Now, quality control if you write for yourself.

We've already established that most people are artistically
illiterate, perhaps even craft junkies, their taste is worthless as
far as art is concerned and only matters if you want to sell them
something or gain their allegiance, and their advice is bad.

And we've already established that you could read about the basics of
art in a week or so, but it could take you a lifetime to master if
ever at all. You know what you need, you don't need anyone to tell you
what it is after a little, it just, by its nature, takes a long time
to get there. And that's a long time of practice. And that's mindful,
meditative practice.






















-- 
Her Lust is Wiser is a book of verse by Biloxi Andersen and Ziad
Noureddine. It is part of ongoing diaries.
http://inkatthedevil.blogspot.com/