I wasn’t so much arguing for the strength of the analogy as for its 
applicability in some measure. Yes, poets have historically been largely 
self-taught, and that, incidentally, was one of my points in criticising 
workshops in earlier posts on this thread. Therefore, I personally don’t 
see the need for courses in poetry composition for the same reasons 
you mention. 

But my point about the relevancy of courses, such as creative writing at 
degree-level, was not so much to defend them per se, but to defend 
the notion of the impotence of degree-level courses, such a philosophy 
or history of art, that make no claim to be practically “useful” to 
society. Perhaps, I’m just an old liberal humanist at heart.

I agree with you about song and its usurping of the poetic “muse”. 




On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:22:29 -0400, Mark Weiss 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>In my own experience a pretty weak analogy. I taught myself prosody
>with the help of a great deal of reading and seven years of writing
>sonnets. Counterpoint would have been more of a stretch.
>
>I came from a family that appreciated poetry and serious music about
>equally, by the way, with an equal lack of education in either. So
>environment probably wasn't a factor.
>
>What can I say? Almost all poets have been largely self-taught, and
>very few composers have been. Probably a reason for this.
>
>But for me the issue remains the sequellae of bureaucratization. We
>risk producing a generation or ten of minnesingers. Especially
>because poetry has ceased to be a part of the popular imagination,
>except for song lyrics.
>
>Mark
>
>At 04:09 PM 8/17/2009, you wrote:
>>I can see David's point when he observes that the stakes are low 
when
>>it comes to the practical ramifications of failed artistic practices.
>>Certainly, no reader has been injured physically from reading a bad
>>poem. Nevertheless, many degree-level disciplines in the humanities
>>and wider arts subjects are similarly risk-free. Does this, then, mean
>>that they should not be catered for at degree-level?
>>
>>Poetry does have certain skill-sets required in its writing, as anyone
>>who has had to sit through endless lectures on prosody will tell you.
>>True, prosody is, perhaps, now a defunct skill in poetic writing but it 
is
>>a skill all the same, as much as that of any involved in musical
>>composition. To the extent that creative writing degree-level courses
>>teach this (along with, hopefully, the historical and theoretical
>>components in the study of literature) then an analogy with degree-
>>level courses in music can apply.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:27:20 -0700, David Latane
>><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> >Here are a few more probably pompous observations. I wasn't 
making
>>an analogy, per se, between jazz and the totality of poetry--but 
trying
>>to answer Mairead's query about whether there was any meaningful
>>distinction between "creative writing" in the academy and training in
>>music, architecture and other fields. One of the distinctions for me is
>>that formal training (apprenticeship, guild, academy) in many
>>artistic/craft fields came long before the granting of degrees for 
writing
>>poetry for practical reasons. There were skills and techniques in 
working
>>with materials that required practice and training--whether playing 
the
>>piano, or engraving a copperplate, or cutting a dovetail. And there 
was
>>a market for certified practitioners. Poetry writing was different.
>> >I think there are big differences between slam poetry (or any 
language
>>creation) and jazz. People with a certain hutzpa and no practice at all
>>can stand up at a slam and make an impact.  People with a certain
>>hutzpa introduced to the piano or saxophone a few days before can't
>>even begin to rip through a few Charlie Parker tunes (with significant
>>variations) without having hard glassy objects thrown at them.
>> >Architecture that gets built requires certain trained skills.
>>When "things fall apart" (Yeats) in poetry "nothing happens" (Auden).
>>When things fall apart on a construction site people are killed and
>>money is lost. Poets' imaginations are free--no telos. Writing for an
>>MFA degree or any other degree requires the end of getting the 
degree
>>to qualify (hopefully temporarily) this freedom. Architects can 
imagine
>>freely too -- but the vast majority of them sit a tables in big firms
>>figuring out how to decorate a box more cheaply. They pay for Pei to
>>play. So I wasn't dismissing any architects--but commenting on a 
fact,
>>based on a goodly acquaintance with what their actually working
>>conditions are like. Only a few are ever given a pile of money and 
told
>>to make something beautiful.
>> >"But poets, or those who imagine and express this indestructible
>>order, are not only the authors of language and of music, of the
>>dance, and architecture, and statuary, and painting; they are the
>>institutors of laws, and the founders of civil society, and the
>>inventors of the arts of life, and the teachers, who draw into a
>>certain propinquity with the beautiful and the true, that partial
>>apprehension of the agencies of the invisible world which is
>>called religion." Shelley--Defence
>> >
>> >
>> >David Latane
>> > http://www.standmagazine.org (Stand Magazine, Leeds)
>> >
>> >
>> >