Sure, but I think many of us here in this ongoing, & fascinating,
conversation, are speaking about what works, at the moment, for us as
we write(or attempt to).
I don't want to deny the 'I', but merely to state that most of the time
it doesn't work as a method for me, right now anyway.
I do think that the discussion is good precisely because it has shown
how different we all are, while clearly committed to artistic 'truth.'
(let's leave 'sincerity' out of it, although I do like Anny's comment
on 'sinceritas'). The work, the poem, needs to come to us as honest [in
its craft, art, whatever] (the writer, well s/he/s somewhere else)...
Doug
On 6-Jun-07, at 4:47 AM, Joseph Duemer wrote:
> "If a poet has something besides themselves and their gift to share
> with us
> . . ."
>
> Yes, agree. And also with the poem as revealing the "fullness of the
> world,"
> in Stephen's phrase. But I think, too, that that not using the first
> person
> is just as often a stance, a position, a pose, as the worst falsely
> "sincere" lyric. If you want to avoid what I would rather call
> sentimentality, you are going to have to do more than abandon the first
> person pronoun. (By 'you' I don't mean anyone it particular, here or
> elsewhere.)
>
> jd
Douglas Barbour
11655 - 72 Avenue NW
Edmonton Ab T6G 0B9
(780) 436 3320
http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/
Latest book: Continuations (with Sheila E Murphy)
http://www.uap.ualberta.ca/UAP.asp?LID=41&bookID=664
Art has to be forgotten: Beauty must be realized.
Piet Mondrian
|