Advice on understanding poetry better.

[ambrosial revelation]

I really need some advice or guidance regarding understanding certain types of poetry. A lot of modern poetry and a lot of poetry on here is almost cryptic when I'm reading it and I really am struggling with this aspect because I really want to understand it. I know that I'm not stupid although at times I do feel that way when reading some poems. I have read a lot of poetry, in fact it is all I have read for the past two years or so. But the poetry that I love the most seems to be poetry that isn't as cryptic and doesn't have hidden meanings as much. Whitman and Ginsberg are two of the poets that I read the most and admire the most, but their poetry seems to be more realistic and therefore easier to understand; although I know that even in their poetry there are double meanings, but these I seem to get. I also love reading Sylvia Plath and most of it I get but there is a lot that I don't and then when I find explanations on the internet it seems so obvious.
I suppose I'm asking if it is a matter of practise, like cryptic crosswords get easier with practise, or is it something that you either get or don't get. It frustrates me at the moment because there are a lot of poems on here that I would like to comment on because there are people who have commented on my poems and I feel it is the respectful thing to do by commenting on their poems. And also I want to comment on as many poems as possible because I feel that it is important to contribute as much as possible.
Any advice or guidance in this area would be much appreciated. Thank you.
Mark

[cidermaid]

Hi mark
Thanks for posting this. I often feel the same way. I find that a lot of the time I would like to post a comment but then I don't because I just feel that I’m missing something and my suggestions seem so weak compared to the imput of others or I just plain don't get it. And yes it frustrates me also.
I'm not so great on punctuation and tend to leave this to those who seem to revel in being punctuation police.
I guess my advice would be to try and just go for it, regardless of how little you understand or get a particular poem. I have days where my confidence is at zero and I have so much self doubt about my ability to be even remotely poetically competent, that I feel completely locked down...but then everyone is normally so gracious and if I put a comment out there, more often than not I find a jolly message by way of thanks commenting on the helpfulness of whatever it was I said. I guess (for me I have decided) there will always be someone smarter, more insightful or just plain more gifted (etc) than me, but the important thing is to just take pleasure in what you discover and to join in at my own level and to try not to worry or compare myself to others. (Easier said than done).
Sorry if this was not actually the sort of help you felt you needed. I will be watching this space myself to see if anyone has something more specific to offer.

[Leanne]

Quick answer: yes, it becomes easier with practise. That doesn't mean it will ever be entirely easy.

Poetry has been done an almost crippling disservice by schoolteachers over the last 50 years or so, with their insistence on what a poem means, when it can only possibly mean what it says in the textbook that the teacher keeps hidden so students think it's a riddle with only one answer. New -- or rather, revived -- thoughts on meaning are that sure, the poet has an intent (sometimes overt, sometimes hidden even to the poet until after the fact) but it's the reader who truly makes meaning out of a text. In some ways we will be in agreement with the poet, because the patterns of words the poet has chosen build on a mood/ feeling and give us a key into their thoughts. In many other ways, however, a good poem will allow us to learn more about our own feelings and reactions to the world rather than dictating what the poet wants us to know. There is the obvious, agreed-upon meaning (denotation) and a myriad of shades and depth to metaphor and other poetic devices that we can only perceive by drawing on our own prior knowledge and experience (connotation).

An inexperienced poet, however, will often forget that the reader needs that key into the poem, the hint that lets him/her know what the poet wanted to convey. Inexperienced poets will sometimes write a bit of a diary entry instead of a true poem, believing either that the reader can guess what's going on through a series of highly obscure and personal motifs that mean nothing to anyone but the poet and perhaps the poet's immediate circle (a bit like a list of "in-jokes"). And some poets, regardless of their experience level, confuse obscurity with cleverness and will simply link a whole stack of pretty-sounding images together in the hope that the reader can make something of them or will be so impressed by wordplay that it doesn't matter anyway. In this regard, sometimes not being able to figure out meaning is not the reader's fault, but the poet's.

This discussion thread from some time ago might be worth revisiting also.

[ambrosial revelation]

Hi mark
Thanks for posting this. I often feel the same way. I find that a lot of the time I would like to post a comment but then I don't because I just feel that I’m missing something and my suggestions seem so weak compared to the imput of others or I just plain don't get it. And yes it frustrates me also.
I'm not so great on punctuation and tend to leave this to those who seem to revel in being punctuation police.
I guess my advice would be to try and just go for it, regardless of how little you understand or get a particular poem. I have days where my confidence is at zero and I have so much self doubt about my ability to be even remotely poetically competent, that I feel completely locked down...but then everyone is normally so gracious and if I put a comment out there, more often than not I find a jolly message by way of thanks commenting on the helpfulness of whatever it was I said. I guess (for me I have decided) there will always be someone smarter, more insightful or just plain more gifted (etc) than me, but the important thing is to just take pleasure in what you discover and to join in at my own level and to try not to worry or compare myself to others. (Easier said than done).
Sorry if this was not actually the sort of help you felt you needed. I will be watching this space myself to see if anyone has something more specific to offer.

Hi cidermaid,
Thanks for taking the time to reply and indeed it was helpful, firstly to know that it's not just me who worries about punctuation, I'm sure I must of missed that part at school because I can't recall at any time being taught it. But as you have mentioned about the 'punctuation police' (great phrase) and how they like to do that, it makes me feel better about not mentioning it. I also relate to the fact that some days it seems to be easier to understand and therefore comment on poems and at other times I just seem to stare at the screen for a long time without any idea of what to say. But there have been a few poems where I have went back to several times even over a few days and still nothing comes to mind. I suppose deep down inside I know that it is practise and eventually it will get easier. I don't have any great ambitions to be a published writer or anything like that, so I'm not setting myself up for a great fall. I know that poetry is something I really do like and I just want to understand it more. But also you have reminded me to enjoy it, which seems so obvious but at times gets swamped by the desire to be better and understand more.
Thanks again for the reply, it has definitely given me things to think about.

---

Quick answer: yes, it becomes easier with practise. That doesn't mean it will ever be entirely easy.

Poetry has been done an almost crippling disservice by schoolteachers over the last 50 years or so, with their insistence on what a poem means, when it can only possibly mean what it says in the textbook that the teacher keeps hidden so students think it's a riddle with only one answer. New -- or rather, revived -- thoughts on meaning are that sure, the poet has an intent (sometimes overt, sometimes hidden even to the poet until after the fact) but it's the reader who truly makes meaning out of a text. In some ways we will be in agreement with the poet, because the patterns of words the poet has chosen build on a mood/ feeling and give us a key into their thoughts. In many other ways, however, a good poem will allow us to learn more about our own feelings and reactions to the world rather than dictating what the poet wants us to know. There is the obvious, agreed-upon meaning (denotation) and a myriad of shades and depth to metaphor and other poetic devices that we can only perceive by drawing on our own prior knowledge and experience (connotation).

An inexperienced poet, however, will often forget that the reader needs that key into the poem, the hint that lets him/her know what the poet wanted to convey. Inexperienced poets will sometimes write a bit of a diary entry instead of a true poem, believing either that the reader can guess what's going on through a series of highly obscure and personal motifs that mean nothing to anyone but the poet and perhaps the poet's immediate circle (a bit like a list of "in-jokes"). And some poets, regardless of their experience level, confuse obscurity with cleverness and will simply link a whole stack of pretty-sounding images together in the hope that the reader can make something of them or will be so impressed by wordplay that it doesn't matter anyway. In this regard, sometimes not being able to figure out meaning is not the reader's fault, but the poet's.

This discussion thread from some time ago might be worth revisiting also.

Hi Leanne,
Thanks for taking the time to reply, you mentioned some very useful points that have made me think about different aspects of poems and poetry. I appreciate what you said about some poetry being a series of personal motifs, and at times it has felt like the "in-jokes" that you mentioned. Also like I mentioned in my reply to cidermaid, I know deep down inside that it must be a matter of practise and looking at things from different angles. In many respects I am still very new to poetry and all the knowledge I have is from what I have read, which I'm sure will be the same for many people on this site. And I think that I need to broaden the types of poetry that I read.
In the short time that I have been here I have learnt a lot and I'm sure that it will continue. I was mostly frustrated on sometimes not being able to comment on certain poems, which I really want to do and think is necessary on a site like this. But you have given me plenty to think about and I have bookmarked the link that you left and will definitely check it out.
Thanks again for the reply, it has been very helpful.

[rowens]

I think it's very important to understand as much as you can about life, and bring that to your understanding of written poetry, and other art forms.

Another important thing needed in understanding is desperation.

[ambrosial revelation]

I think it's very important to understand as much as you can about life, and bring that to your understanding of written poetry, and other art forms.

Another important thing needed in understanding is desperation.

Thanks rowens,
That does actually make a lot of sense and it is what I used to do and still do as regards music. I am a musician first and foremost and I always believed that the more I experienced in life the better a musician I became and it is true. And for whatever reason I failed to act in the same way as regards poetry, it is as if I am thinking it instead of feeling it, the way I do with music.
It makes sense, or I should say, it feels right.
Thank you.

[Leanne]

it is as if I am thinking it instead of feeling it

Common mistake. For some reason poetry is often seen as something to be deciphered/decoded instead of something to enjoy. That enjoyment (or lack of) is a valid thing to comment on, so long as it's specific rather than just cut-and-paste type "I like this, good flow, nice image, blah blah next poem please".

We don't look at a painting and demand to know everything about the artist's intent. We enjoy it. We let its colours and textures seep into us. We take pleasure in its lines, its form, its image. Once we are immersed in it, then it may speak to us of deeper things, give us insights, allow us to view the world in a different way -- or we may just love it for itself. It is the same with music, sculpture, architecture... is poetry less of an art than these?

[billy]

buckowski is one my reads for uncluttered poetry.

many poets haven't a clue what a metaphor is or how to use it. similes are easy to understand. ambiguity is a ball ache. often people write with ambiguity and even they have no idea how they got to where they did, they already had an answer in their head. if they understand it, so should we. as leanne said, a good poem is often an enjoyable one. often those are the ones we don't understand straight away but find after a couple of reads that the poem opens up to us. read jabberwocky from alice in wonderland, a nonsense poem, at first it's shite but each read and we see more and more of what the poem is saying. how ambiguous can a poem be than that particular one yet we see what he's saying, that's because he's saying what he is for a reason. the bad one's are ambiguous because only the writer has any clue what their saying. you'll get the hang of understanding poetry to a better extent but if a poems gobbledy gook it won't be easy for anyone. when giving feedback just say what you think "i don't understand the metaphor"

[rowens]

People kept talking about Bukowski, so I read more of him. When it comes to poetry, he's like chasing your shit with whiskey when you're used to eating your shit straight.

[ambrosial revelation]

buckowski is one my reads for uncluttered poetry.

many poets haven't a clue what a metaphor is or how to use it. similes are easy to understand. ambiguity is a ball ache. often people write with ambiguity and even they have no idea how they got to where they did, they already had an answer in their head. if they understand it, so should we. as leanne said, a good poem is often an enjoyable one. often those are the ones we don't understand straight away but find after a couple of reads that the poem opens up to us. read jabberwocky from alice in wonderland, a nonsense poem, at first it's shite but each read and we see more and more of what the poem is saying. how ambiguous can a poem be than that particular one yet we see what he's saying, that's because he's saying what he is for a reason. the bad one's are ambiguous because only the writer has any clue what their saying. you'll get the hang of understanding poetry to a better extent but if a poems gobbledy gook it won't be easy for anyone. when giving feedback just say what you think "i don't understand the metaphor"

Thanks Billy,
What you have said also makes sense, especially about metaphor. I know that with all these replies together that I've had to this post, there's some very fine wisdom there and when I manage to let it all sink in it will benefit me a lot.
I've just found the jabberwocky within my books and I've read it once and I see what you mean, but I will keep on reading it.
I've also found Bukowski and I see what you mean also both you and rowens.
Thanks again for the advice, it's all good stuff.

---

I really need some advice or guidance regarding understanding certain types of poetry. A lot of modern poetry and a lot of poetry on here is almost cryptic when I'm reading it and I really am struggling with this aspect because I really want to understand it. I know that I'm not stupid although at times I do feel that way when reading some poems. I have read a lot of poetry, in fact it is all I have read for the past two years or so. But the poetry that I love the most seems to be poetry that isn't as cryptic and doesn't have hidden meanings as much. Whitman and Ginsberg are two of the poets that I read the most and admire the most, but their poetry seems to be more realistic and therefore easier to understand; although I know that even in their poetry there are double meanings, but these I seem to get. I also love reading Sylvia Plath and most of it I get but there is a lot that I don't and then when I find explanations on the internet it seems so obvious.
I suppose I'm asking if it is a matter of practise, like cryptic crosswords get easier with practise, or is it something that you either get or don't get. It frustrates me at the moment because there are a lot of poems on here that I would like to comment on because there are people who have commented on my poems and I feel it is the respectful thing to do by commenting on their poems. And also I want to comment on as many poems as possible because I feel that it is important to contribute as much as possible.
Any advice or guidance in this area would be much appreciated. Thank you.
Mark

Hey, My favorite poet once said: I think to tie meaning too closely to understanding misses the point. If the writer had something specific that he/she wants to get through to you, then it's the writer's responsibly to deliver that point to you clearly, and in a way that you can understand. If it doesn't make any sense to you, let them know so they can fix it.

Other than that, it's the readers' bag, man. It's the readers' bag.

Thanks trueenigma,
As I was reading what you wrote, I was thinking this sounds very familiar and then I just realised that it is what you use for your signature, which I have read many times without really taking it in properly. I think there has been a few answers to my question that have been staring me in the face and I wasn't paying attention, and now it seems obvious.
Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
Much appreciated.