 |
 |
Yes, a poem on a page is a performance, but no, it does not require the presence of the poet. The whole question is riven with paradox and is probably an outcome of one of the core paradoxes of language: of its being both public and common, and yet private and personal. The voice in the head and the voices in the street. Catullus' famous little poem, 'Odi et amo', is a two line drama, a two thousand plus year old drama that is blazingly re-enacted in silent and outloud reading, yet we cannot have any idea of the poet's actual voice, and only conjectural reconstructions of elements of pronunciation. But it doesn't matter. Current preoccupations with performance often seem to me to recapitulate a commodity fetishism that is characteristic of our capitalism. On 21 May 2015 at 15:18, Lawrence Upton <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > There are poets who seem to promise much via the page; but one hears them > and realises that it was / is a mirage, however goodit may have been in > their heads. Others let themselves down in performance. > > Just because someone lets themselves down in performance does not > invalidate performance in general. > > For me, and I say it no more strongly than that, the written poem is a > score for or transcription of performance. At this late date it may not > seem so: poetry has come to so many of us as pages in a book.... But silent > reading is a relatively recent phenomenon > > It may be that some performances block reception of some aspects of the > poem. So it goes. Chap started talking to me this morning and I responded > because he seemed open and well-intentioned, though I couldn't really make > out what he was saying; and I was some way into the conversation before I > fully realised our topic. > > I may sometimes really wish that I could have grasped the full text of > something... but I do not accept there are any absolutes to be received > unsullied by earthly matters. > > I'd dearly love to hear the voices of Housman and Flecker read some of > their poems – I could make a little list – not because they are “great” but > because they made poems, lines often, from which I have learned, > experiencing great pleasure, and would like to learn more. > > Someone remarked tome recently how overwhelming they found the experience > of reading Bunting. Well, I heard the man read the man read several times – > in the same room as him – and that too was overwhelming. I value it; but I > am not sure how much I learned that I have applied successfully to my own > practice, apart from the bit about the waste paper basket! But nothing > directly from the hearing. That was the best, maybe, legal high I have > known; and that's all I can say > > It might be that some including AEH and JEF read their rather dully and or > incompetently. We have been offered infamous examples of that already; but > that's the way it is. I'd rather have the information than the illusory > hit. > > I have written somewhere a line about hearing the words of Vergil as he > spoke them (forget please how poor my first century bce Latin is. to the > point where this desire is laughable) though I am unsure if I nicked it > from someone else – I think it may be a variation on Forster's “to see the > hills as Aelfred saw them” from 'The Machine stops' – and that reflects for > me the nature of poetry – a time-based art, with books at best ruins shored > against entropy > -- David Joseph Bircumshaw Website and A Chide's Alphabet http://www.staplednapkin.org.uk The Animal Subsides http://www.arrowheadpress.co.uk/books/animal.html Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/david.bircumshaw Tumblr: http://zantikus.tumblr.com/ twitter: http://twitter.com/bucketshave blog: http://groggydays.blogspot.com/ Leicester Poetry Society: http://www.poetryleicester.com