AH, I tend to agree, although we might not agree about who does it well, & who does not. But I have heard some poets read & have larded something new about their work, or to appreciate it more than I had previous to hearing them.
All things are possible.
I too read with my ears, as you say, Andrew, which may be why I even make something of that distinction with popular fiction; but then we’re really talking Sturgeon’s Law here…
There are some poets who seduce with their voices, but if there’s no substance there, it will be a short affair, I think.
Doug
On May 18, 2015, at 11:45 PM, Andrew Burke <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Well, horses for courses. Some poets read very well, and project a rich
> personality when they perform. Some poets are dull on the page until you
> hear them read - then it opens up the tone and character of the written
> word. Dylan Thomas can seduce new listeners to his printed words, and John
> Berryman brings the Dream Songs alive. Yet Eliot and Lowell murder their
> own works.
>
> I read the printed page silently with my ears. I hear words as I read - but
> this happens with all texts - and separates me from many authors of prose
> who I can't stand - flat, dull and lifeless. No names, no pack drill. I
> came to writing from song lyrics as a child, so I'm guessing that's where
> this habit stems from. (It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing
> ...Duke & Irving Mills)
>
> Now, all lurkers, speak yr mind.
>
>
> Andrew
>
> On 19 May 2015 at 10:13, Bill Wootton <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Tend to agree, Hal. The fewer distractions the better.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>> On 19 May 2015, at 12:53 am, Halvard Johnson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, I'll just make one point. Not right or wrong, as Lawrence says, but
>>> still I find that the less there is of the poet between the poem and my
>>> receptors the better. So, I guess I'd prefer hearing the poet's voice
>> via a
>>> recording to hearing the live poet read. And to either of those I prefer
>>> the words on the screen or the page.
>>>
>>> "*Vraiment*,
>>> Poetry can be so many more things
>>> Than what people mostly believe it is."
>>>
>>> --Anselm Hollo
>>>
>>> Halvard Johnson
>>> ================
>>>
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>> <
>> http://www.amazon.com/Remains-To-Be-Seen-Works/dp/1933132787/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1367618323&sr=8-1&keywords=Halvard+Johnson
>>>
>>> Winter Journey <https://www.createspace.com/5376388> <-- Newest!!!
>>> Trapeze <http://issuu.com/swirlmag/docs/halvard_johnson> <--- Newer!!
>>> Junkyard Dog
>>> <
>> http://gradientbooks.blogspot.fi/2015/01/halvard-johnson-junkyard-dog.html
>>>
>>> <--- New!
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Lawrence Upton <[log in to unmask]
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> ok
>>>> I meant "much prefer" rather than the "must prefer" that I sent.
>>>> As to the preference for reception mode, i don't think there is any
>> right
>>>> or wrong.
>>>> I could perhaps argue my position; but don't feel that keen to assert
>> it!
>>>> All best
>>>> L
>>>>
>>>>> On 18 May 2015 at 15:22, Halvard Johnson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I prefer the words on a screen or on a page to the sound of the
>> writer's
>>>>> voice recorded or not.
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Monday, May 18, 2015, Lawrence Upton <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I must prefer being in the reading presence of a poet I value than
>>>>> hearing
>>>>>> a recording; but that creates certain difficulties, logistical
>>>>> difficulties
>>>>>> that are probably insurmountable -- only a few can get to the gig.
>>>>>> I find it wearisome that we should be considering the idea of ac-tors
>>>>>> reading poetry for us. They are not trained to read poetry but to
>>>> perform
>>>>>> plays. There are overlaps of course, where poets write plays or poems
>>>>> that
>>>>>> work "dramatically".
>>>>>> In my radio experience actors mess it up.
>>>>>> I'm not saying that poets don't mess it up. Many do. But they have the
>>>>>> potential incentive to learn to read poetry aloud.
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> The author limits himself to linear writing. He just doesn't mention
>>>> the
>>>>>> poetries that might come under the turgid heading of vispo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> L
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 18 May 2015 at 09:30, Bill Wootton <[log in to unmask]
>>>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Interesting observations here, not least :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Poems, by contrast, [with recorded readings] often seem more like
>>>> acts
>>>>> of
>>>>>>> specialized witnessing, and this makes the witness himself an
>>>> essential
>>>>>>> figure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is a place for recordings I think but I like to think even my
>>>>>> clumsy
>>>>>>> or 'arrived-at' readings offer me something that passive listening
>>>> does
>>>>>> not.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bill
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 16/05/2015, at 3:37 AM, Max Richards wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/17/books/review/toward-an-oral-art.html?emc=edit_bk_20150515&nl=books&nlid=22180501
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> :: from the desk of Halvard Johnson ::
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Andrew
> http://hispirits.blogspot.com/
> 'Undercover of Lightness'
> http://walleahpress.com.au/recent-publications.html
> 'Shikibu Shuffle'
> http://abovegroundpress.blogspot.com.au/2012/03/new-from-aboveground-press-shikibu.html
Douglas Barbour
[log in to unmask]
Recent publications: (With Sheila E Murphy) Continuations & Continuation 2 (UofAPress).
Recording Dates (Rubicon Press).
There is no life that does not rise
melodic from scales of the marvelous.
To which our grief refers.
Robert Duncan.
|