Which is more important?

[cidermaid]

Which is more important?
I thought the following comment I received in a pm was worth some further consideration:- They are into what poetry is; and I'm into what life is and how poetry expresses that.
When writing poetry, what is the most important aspect when you write? Is it to capture the moment or the image that has gripped you and to stay as true as you can to this…are you into life and want to use poetry to express this; or is it that the poem, the sounds and the structure – the poetry of the poem, is the ultimate end point and objective of the exercise…are you into what poetry is.
(Personally, for me, I think it is both; I write because I feel passionate about something (hate, love , inspirational what ever the passion is), but there comes a point in the creation of a poem where the poem itself becomes my new passion and I become more detached from the original idea or image in my quest to create something of equal worth to the original object of inspiration. Like scales with the inspiration on one side and the poem on the other I always want the quality of my poem to match the inspirational impact and passion of the original object or thought.
But just occasionally I think we write a poem that is so close to home that it is difficult to be detached enough to edit. Then the boundaries become blurred because we feel the need to keep such a tight control – each word carries personal meaning and to edit these individual word choices is almost like editing our own lives. Personally when this happens I write a poem for myself and squirrel it away and then write a second poem for public consumption.
Any other experiences or thoughts on this aspect of writing poetry?

[Todd]

Just an observation before entering into this discussion fully:

The inspiration starts me writing, but the poem lives outside of me. There is never a point where I feel like editing a word choice is editing my own life. I feel that we are imperfect channels of what we try to convey, and only through editing when we make EACH word count in a poem does the poem shine. The ideal is that everything in the poem is your best word and your best line. This is never a first draft in my opinion. As we put the work in our early drafts better reflect the ideal, but we are also able to see more flaws.

I don't know if I'd say I'm into life in the way this is framed. I'm into capturing true observations and conveying some level of emotional experience.

Just initial thoughts

[ellajam]

This question is at the heart of where I am in my writing right now, and the answer is, of course, both.

My motto was "Ain't no poetry police here". I posted on Last line, First line threads, haiku and tanka threads, and personal poetry threads where poems in response were welcomed. They are great for getting into the habit of daily writing, and for inspiration, an idea to work with.

I once posted on someone's thread who commented that it seemed my poem came out fully formed in one shot. I laughed and responded that they all do. He asked why I didn't have enough respect for them to edit and I honestly answered "Nah, they're just my mind babble". But that comment seems to have stuck with me.

Eventually I could see the difference between my trash and my treasures so I looked for a place to work on them. No place seemed like anything I wanted to be a part of until I came here. They all seemed to come down one side of the heart or structure question, and I like the view from the fence.

I know that the heart of the poem is all that matters, but I am learning to convey that heart more effectively. I am developing quite a convoluted method of editing, mucking it all up then coming back to the original hopefully with some improvements.

I write for fun, and right now it's fun to take what in fact I hold tightly and make it walk the tightrope. It usually comes out alive, though not always.

[rowens]

I don't think that capturing a moment or situation out of life is all that important. Writing from moment inspiration isn't very important.
And I think that the subject breeds the form. Writing from life, invented situations or impossible situations. That's what life is made of.
Somebody can decide to write a series of sonnets on different subjects, skillfully working each subject into that form. I wouldn't do that, though I might one day. I don't care enough about poetry to do that.
For me, the subject always works out its own form and whatever techniques and poetic devices through the process of writing. The inspiration of the poem and its form or lack of form come at the same moment and it starts evolving. I simply write.
I don't know what poetry is till I'm finished. I try to forget about other poems, though sometimes I keep a few in mind. I never know what poetry is until I see it. I write and revise till I'm finished.
Then I think about poetry more, and I revise more or I don't. It depends.
I don't care about what poetry is, or what other people say and know about poetry. Not until I'm finished writing and revising.
Then I think about what they say, and I take it all into consideration until I make another poem.

[Charlesjoseph]

A few years back someone gave me an Emily Dickinson poem that was red-penned by a poetry professor. If i can find it i'll post it for the forum to check out. It blew my mind to tell you the truth because he ripped it apart.
Anyway, i think there are two sides to this. Editing is unfortunately a necessary evil if someone wants to become better at their craft. (I'm a hard headed work in progress) But the rules of what poetry is subjective to the writer and reader. If a writer becomes known he/she can do whatever he/she wants artistically and people will still buy it and read it. Bukowski's works have sold millions of copies in many languages and there are a lot of people who would say that he was not a great poet. Ok, well you know what i think sell a few million copies of your work and then tell me what poetry is. Any artistic medium without change becomes redundant.

"Hey Fred, what do you think of my new painting?"
Fred scratched his chin whiskers and contemplated Pablo's bleak future.
"I don't know," he said, "I think there are just too many cubes my friend."

[ChristopherSea]

Poetry is a great way of stepping out of yourself if you wish too. That is why I must reiterate many times that 'The poem is not the poet'. When I hear that a poem is insensitive or biased or preachy or whatever, it seems like a ridiculous comment. On the other hand, I am very proud of a piece that disturbs others due to its effectiveness. We don’t characterize an author who writes of a rape, murder or about slavery, as condoning them. It's a strange assumption that the poet writes exclusively about himself, his feelings or his opinions. We are allowed to write fiction.

[billy]

for me the important thing is the writing. something i need to do. it doesn't really matter about the experiences or what not though experiences can play a big part. think of a door and write about it or an apple or a penguin. that's what really important. then comes the most important....making it as good as you can

[Truerenigma]

I suppose I'll join in. I read and write poetry because I'm interested in language, in words—the thing that separates us from the other animals—not because I want to hear about other peoples lives, or ramble on about my own. However, that doesn't mean that we should sell our life experiences short. When I read, hear, or see something that can be articulated in a way that speaks to me as a human being, I immediately develop a poetic interest. For me though, poetry is not a wide angle lens, it sharpens these moments. Prose would be the high-beams that light the entire road at once, poetry is a single point of light that examines every inch of that pavement one granule at a time, and then reassembles it into a work of art, but not before pointing itself at the stars and remembering that there are other lights out there too.

[Glittercake]

For me poetry is just a way of expressing myself and my feelings. It's obviously more than that but I feel like that's what it encompasses. A way to express, a way to figure out what it truly is you're feeling. If you put it on a page you can see it for what it really is, because it's no longer just a thought. It's an expression and you get it or you can't. It didn't really matter though, because it's yours. I love how anything can be put into words by poetry... I think that's beautiful.

[milo]

For my part, I think whichever makes the poetry itself better is the correct choice. I have no interest in random people's /feelings/ or their life experiences anymore than I think anyone is interested in mine. What I am interested in is reading poems that represent the best or most original way of crafting an experience in words. Personally, none of my writing is in any way related to me or my life experiences but if some can make better poetry by using that than that is what I want. Everything should be sacrificed for the poem, ego most of all.

[cidermaid]

There has been some great comments, many of which i have read and thought -Yep I can see that is valid and true; but then I still have a thorn that irks me about the content of some of the poems after they have been editied. My basic problem is that i like to read poems than mean something or convey an image that I can access and on some level relate to.
Don't get me wrong, I am firmly of the opinion that any art, poetry included, should represent the best skills and be ...well clever! This concept is easier to describe connected to painting. I like to dabble with waterclours - the results are mostly crap (but i get pleasure from it so this is ok) But basically my rule of thumb for a painting being any good or not is "Could I have painted this?" Generally if the answer is yes then it is not art! To craft a fine poem is an art, art takes time to hone and practice. So here we all are practicing our skills.

I am struggling to find a way to express this... and in part this is a problem. (I'm just letting some thoughts rattle around here). Everyone is very good at nitpicking at individual words to make sure they are the best balanced word, with just the right sonics etc. etc...but what has actually been said? Here is my thing. Smetimes when I go through some older posts and lokk at the final edit, I don't get it. Yes it is beutifully in meter and rhymes and well just pretty on the ear. Fantastic, it might also have some great images and twists on cliches, but sadly I have no idea what the hell it is trying to convey. Yet when I go down the page and get to the original I can read the story or the base image shines though and it all makes sense. Then i can go back to the final edit and perhaps see it. But it will be as through a glass - distorted and fuzzy.

I think in our (collective) endevours to make the poem the best it can be, we sometimes loose that moment of sharp focus that True spoke of or the idea that resonated with me from Todd:- I'm into capturing true observations and conveying some level of emotional experience.

[justcloudy]

I think for me it depends on the poem. Sometimes there's a story I want to tell and then I sit down and try to figure out how to tell it. Those poems are usually more... frustrating... for me to write.

Usually what happens is a line pops into my head and I just find it lovely. Sometimes it is quickly followed by a few more, sometimes it's just one line. I write them down and leave it. A while later (hours, days, months-- depends) I look at it, and sometimes it works nicely and sometimes I have no idea what it's saying, even if it sounds nice. So then I start to shape it. It's like when you doodle and draw an initial shape, and then have to decide where to go from there. At that point I try to match the rhythm/sonics of the rest to the first bit, and that determines whether it'll rhyme or have a strict form or whatever.

Sometimes I get attached to those first two lines even if they don't belong to the rest of what I ended up writing, and cutting them is necessary but painful. So then I end up with a poem that kinda came out of nowhere.

So yep, that's my general process... far from a perfect one. ;D

AJ I totally know what you mean though, when poems get edited so much they lose their heart. Sometimes it's best to leave well enough alone, but when so many people are suggesting different things after you post something, it's easy to get lost...

-justcloudy

[Leanne]

Editing and keeping your poem true to your experience need not be mutually exclusive. That's where experience and confidence come in. A good writer has the confidence to consider and disregard plenty of advice before deciding which piece to apply. Most often, the workshopping process is where you learn the most about why you wrote your poem in the first place. Were you really telling the story of your grandmother, or was it about your own aspirations? Is the dog at the end of the street the tragic figure, or is it your father? Is everything you write really about sex or are your readers just perverts?

The advice you receive in a workshop should never be seen as an imperative. Editing is as much an art form as the initial writing (and I would strongly argue that it is moreso).

My own writing process is much like justcloudy's, for the most part. Unless it's something silly (which these days is most often milo's fault), poems don't drop fully formed onto the page. A line or two at a time, that's where it starts, and they grow when they're ready. But then again, maybe those are the ones you find distorted and fuzzy

[Truerenigma]

I think in our (collective) endeavours to make the poem the best it can be, we sometimes loose that moment of sharp focus that True spoke of

That's all well and good, but may not necessarily be true; the edit, fuzzy or not, may be the truer account of the authors experience (for all we know). As for me, I would most likely do better to write a poem /in/ these moments than /about/ them.

or the idea that resonated with me from Todd:- I'm into capturing true observations and conveying some level of emotional experience.

That's all fine and good too, but it's hardly a requirement, or even a common element of all "good" poetry.

If I only wanted to do is accurately record a factual event, and convey, or /express/, my feelings about it, I think prose would be the simpler, and more effective way of doing so. Poetry's mnemonics (rhyme, meter, refrain, line breaks) are no longer needed for processing and holding on to knowledge. Little hard drives, texting devices, and video cameras are available everywhere. Poetry may be an /aesthetics of omission/. Among other things, poetry is a tampering with truths which the world of prose (and its naturalistic approach to mimesis) takes for granted. Poetry creates its own /truth/, it may be the same truth as the world's, and it may not. Whichever the case may be, its mimesis is always a rearrangement, at a molecular level, of that axis between the "seen" and the "felt" /that axis which connects the childish eye to the Socratic heart/, which, were it not for poetry, with its misguided Method of elenchus, would remain obscured. But I don't I think the poem necessarily needs to be /clever/ either—sometimes the simpler approach is the correct one, and the genius may lie in the reading.

In a workshop, we can only critique the words and their arrangement, tone, sound, form, voice, etc. We are in no position to critique the experience of the author, or their /feelings/, perspectives, points of view, etc...we have no idea where they are coming from.

I don't think that it is necessary to write from an actual experience, or event, or series of events; or that an author's poems need to say anything about the author, aside, perhaps, about his or her level of skill, and dedication to their craft. Just as how someone who is studying a painting may think they are looking into the dark recesses in the corners of the artist's mind—the artist may have just been admiring the Fibonacci sequence in a sea shell, and it may have impacted them profoundly, or maybe they just thought that they could apply its /form/ to a painting of a cityscape, in a way that would be appealing to the eye.

You see, it's when having an intrinsic understanding of some particular thing helps reveal unto the poet /how/ it may lend itself to poetic form—thereien lies the /true/ value of experience.

[LanceRocks]

Speaking for myself, the poem matters, not me.

A poem is an object like a vase thrown on a wheel. Of course we made it, but it's going to leave our hands: such is the intent of creation, is it not? To pass our work along?

Ergo, the object must have an integrity of its own. Given the choice of sacrificing personal meaning or a well-integrated structure, I'll toss personal meaning every time.

Novice poets want their personal experiences respected as part of the inherent value of their piece. A critic like me doesn't care. I don't care what a poem is about, and sometimes I don't know. I care if the poem is well-crafted...that's about it.

[cidermaid]

@True.
Hi! As ever you makes some fine sounding statements and any reasonable person would of course be won over by such intellectually profound sounding arguments. Sadly I’m not reasonable, or even of a sound mind much of the time. So please excuse me whilst on have a little rant on the side here --
I hate PC and I have a particular hatred of pretentious artsy bollocks (Others might like to bandy around the faux poetic tag, but I think there is a lower level that poetry can be reduced too – Perhaps I should have put this reply into the thread on irritating critique). Distressingly, for me, poetry seems to attract a higher than average percentage of individuals who, when they put on a badge saying “Poet” become… (and everyone please note, this is in reference to the subject of the thread and the root of my niggle, rather than a personal attack on any individuals)…but sorry I’m just going to have to say it …Poets - Willy waving, intellectual wannabe’s’ with a God complex. (Worse yet, because of the need to still conform and be PC, the willy waving becomes homogenised, so that it is the same old garbage trotted out time and time again). A few intellectual sounding words, a healthy dose of worthy names casually dropped into the text, a sprinkling of scientific references to obscure or random branches of research and scientific fields and the components for our posing platform are neatly assembled. Having assembled the key components obviously the lines need to be fleshed out with plenty of quotes from the plebs (the effect of the God complex is kicking in around now – the assembly of worshipful subjects needs to know that their god is a listening god who understands them – but that his thoughts are higher than their thoughts of course!); next deliberately misinterpret or twist the quotes so that they can be shoehorned into the standard text. Voila ! We have a perfectly homogenised willy ready to be waved.
And mostly I love it. I adore all the faux bitch fights that bounce back and forth. Some of you people are genuinely comic and near genius in your ability to flash out quick witted replies and poetically phrased, perfect putdowns. Way out of my league, so most of the time I’ll just stand on the sidelines and applause. However, I did have a point I was trying to make behind my rant above. (That was just the intro). I do think that we have a problem in the workshop boards. This is my thorn: the pretentious artsy bollocks is counter productive and distracts from the poetry writing. I think it inhibits any true creativity and encourages the aforementioned willy waving behaviour. How many times do we read the comment that ego has no place in a poetry forum; but this is normally said in response to a complaint against “mature” poets eviscerating a newer poet and said newer poet complaining against the brutality or rudeness of the comments. Down the path we go of telling them to toughen up and grow some thicker skin. True enough, I would mostly agree that only brutal honesty and openness to receive this type of critique will open the door to poetic advancement. (No pain, no gain and all that good stuff). But we are fooling ourselves if we think that some of the crap that is spouted on this site in the name of honest critique is not birthed out of the most humongous egos I have ever seen. (Bearing in mind that I have largely lived surrounded by business tycoons, bankers, lawyers, scientists, high ranking military men and last but not least new money….old money is mostly couth and has more grace! I think I am qualified to say I know an ego when I see one). Sorry, I know I have gone off topic, but the nuts and bolts of what I am getting at is in there somewhere.

True –Really this is really your honest thought process in response to the thread question and subsequent comments?! “Poetry… its mimesis is always a rearrangement, at a molecular level, of that axis between the "seen" and the "felt" /that axis which connects the childish eye to the Socratic heart/, which, were it not for poetry, with its misguided Method of elenchus, would remain obscured…."

Here is a side question:- Do you need to be an egotistical, willy waving, intellectual wannabe with a god complex to be a good poet?

Meanwhile back at your answer True…
There were a couple of salient points in your reply that made some sense.
Basically I would agree with the following:-
• - the edit, fuzzy or not, may be the truer account of the authors experience (for all we know).
• Prose might be a better framework in which to record a factual event.
• In a workshop, we can only critique the words and their arrangement, tone, sound, form, voice, etc. We are in no position to critique the experience of the author, or their /feelings/, perspectives, points of view, etc...we have no idea where they are coming from.
I was struggling to decipher the rest of the points you made, due to the heavy application of assertive statements of the truth according to True. (Please note that I refrained from calling your reply artsy bollocks – I have no idea what experiences you might have had that would lead you to utter such things and indeed I have no idea where you are coming from)
I think you made the following comments, but please do correct me if I have twisted your meaning. I was struggling to make much sense or meaning from what was written, (so I made my own truth up and assembled my words around this, so that, if this text is ever critiqued I can always hide behind the protection of:- the art of the construction of these words is only to be ascertained in the eye and the interpretation of the reader).
• You think that those who wish to write poetry based around capturing true observations and conveying some level of emotional experience are wrong in this desire because good poetry does not require this and it is not even a common element / component of good poetry. So therefore anyone who writes with this as their starting point is by your definition – not a good poet.
• Factual knowledge and information has no place in poetry (it is better contained on film and in hard drives).
• Poetry creates it’s own truth and does not need to conform to even the basics of comprehensive accessibility, because this is down to the skill of the reader (who by unspoken definition, to be any good, has to be able to interpret what the poet was conveying with no logical markers to guide them or alternately gets to make up their own version of reality from the list of assembled words)


I think we need we need “both kinds, Sugar…country and western”! I don’t think we should have just experience based life poetry, or equally poetically perfect lines of words that are inaccessible to any but those who attain a higher light of revelation, I want “four whole fried chickens”. Chuck it in a bucket and put a fried egg on top and don’t step in my bucket. Haute cuisine is overrated. Two day old curry refried is far better. I know there are differing levels of ability to both write and read poetry, but the poetry has to be grounded at some level in an accessible level, otherwise it might as well be written in Klingon.
(If the answer [to the side question] is yes, then I need to go off and form the “unborn poets society” because I have failed at the first hurdle. I want to write poetry, but I am a life long subscriber to being a reject and a failure and general all round, society misfit and actually I’m quite happy in that position because I don’t want to fit in. – I hate PC, media manipulation and spin makes me mad – in particular I think global warming is a load of claptrap, I’m a dissenter of the first order, I don’t want to be in fashion and in step. I don’t feel the need to be an intellectual. I’m hopeless at remembering anything – including names and useless trivia and facts. In short, I’ve had a look at mainstream and decided it is vastly overrated and not for me and willy waving competitions are not as interesting as poetry).
I must now apologise because I am doing a fire and forget post here as I will be offsite for a week. So good news True, you get to have the last say and have time to think up a really good putdown, as by the time I am back the discussion will have moved on. So you win. Enjoy! I will sit here in my wrongness happily enough. (Being a winner smells too much like fitting in the box for my tastes). Alternatively, I lied and when I get back (if I have not been shunned), perhaps I will get a grip and a life and join in the fun by starting a thread entitled “cod piece of the week”.

[tectak]

@True.
Hi! As ever you makes some fine sounding statements and any reasonable person would of course be won over by such intellectually profound sounding arguments. Sadly I’m not reasonable, or even of a sound mind much of the time. So please excuse me whilst on have a little rant on the side here --
I hate PC and I have a particular hatred of pretentious artsy bollocks (Others might like to bandy around the faux poetic tag, but I think there is a lower level that poetry can be reduced too – Perhaps I should have put this reply into the thread on irritating critique). Distressingly, for me, poetry seems to attract a higher than average percentage of individuals who, when they put on a badge saying “Poet” become… (and everyone please note, this is in reference to the subject of the thread and the root of my niggle, rather than a personal attack on any individuals)…but sorry I’m just going to have to say it …Poets - Willy waving, intellectual wannabe’s’ with a God complex. (Worse yet, because of the need to still conform and be PC, the willy waving becomes homogenised, so that it is the same old garbage trotted out time and time again). A few intellectual sounding words, a healthy dose of worthy names casually dropped into the text, a sprinkling of scientific references to obscure or random branches of research and scientific fields and the components for our posing platform are neatly assembled. Having assembled the key components obviously the lines need to be fleshed out with plenty of quotes from the plebs (the effect of the God complex is kicking in around now – the assembly of worshipful subjects needs to know that their god is a listening god who understands them – but that his thoughts are higher than their thoughts of course!); next deliberately misinterpret or twist the quotes so that they can be shoehorned into the standard text. Voila ! We have a perfectly homogenised willy ready to be waved.
And mostly I love it. I adore all the faux bitch fights that bounce back and forth. Some of you people are genuinely comic and near genius in your ability to flash out quick witted replies and poetically phrased, perfect putdowns. Way out of my league, so most of the time I’ll just stand on the sidelines and applause. However, I did have a point I was trying to make behind my rant above. (That was just the intro). I do think that we have a problem in the workshop boards. This is my thorn: the pretentious artsy bollocks is counter productive and distracts from the poetry writing. I think it inhibits any true creativity and encourages the aforementioned willy waving behaviour. How many times do we read the comment that ego has no place in a poetry forum; but this is normally said in response to a complaint against “mature” poets eviscerating a newer poet and said newer poet complaining against the brutality or rudeness of the comments. Down the path we go of telling them to toughen up and grow some thicker skin. True enough, I would mostly agree that only brutal honesty and openness to receive this type of critique will open the door to poetic advancement. (No pain, no gain and all that good stuff). But we are fooling ourselves if we think that some of the crap that is spouted on this site in the name of honest critique is not birthed out of the most humongous egos I have ever seen. (Bearing in mind that I have largely lived surrounded by business tycoons, bankers, lawyers, scientists, high ranking military men and last but not least new money….old money is mostly couth and has more grace! I think I am qualified to say I know an ego when I see one). Sorry, I know I have gone off topic, but the nuts and bolts of what I am getting at is in there somewhere.

True –Really this is really your honest thought process in response to the thread question and subsequent comments?! “Poetry… its mimesis is always a rearrangement, at a molecular level, of that axis between the "seen" and the "felt" /that axis which connects the childish eye to the Socratic heart/, which, were it not for poetry, with its misguided Method of elenchus, would remain obscured…."

Here is a side question:- Do you need to be an egotistical, willy waving, intellectual wannabe with a god complex to be a good poet?

Meanwhile back at your answer True…
There were a couple of salient points in your reply that made some sense.
Basically I would agree with the following:-
• - the edit, fuzzy or not, may be the truer account of the authors experience (for all we know).
• Prose might be a better framework in which to record a factual event.
• In a workshop, we can only critique the words and their arrangement, tone, sound, form, voice, etc. We are in no position to critique the experience of the author, or their /feelings/, perspectives, points of view, etc...we have no idea where they are coming from.
I was struggling to decipher the rest of the points you made, due to the heavy application of assertive statements of the truth according to True. (Please note that I refrained from calling your reply artsy bollocks – I have no idea what experiences you might have had that would lead you to utter such things and indeed I have no idea where you are coming from)
I think you made the following comments, but please do correct me if I have twisted your meaning. I was struggling to make much sense or meaning from what was written, (so I made my own truth up and assembled my words around this, so that, if this text is ever critiqued I can always hide behind the protection of:- the art of the construction of these words is only to be ascertained in the eye and the interpretation of the reader).
• You think that those who wish to write poetry based around capturing true observations and conveying some level of emotional experience are wrong in this desire because good poetry does not require this and it is not even a common element / component of good poetry. So therefore anyone who writes with this as their starting point is by your definition – not a good poet.
• Factual knowledge and information has no place in poetry (it is better contained on film and in hard drives).
• Poetry creates it’s own truth and does not need to conform to even the basics of comprehensive accessibility, because this is down to the skill of the reader (who by unspoken definition, to be any good, has to be able to interpret what the poet was conveying with no logical markers to guide them or alternately gets to make up their own version of reality from the list of assembled words)


I think we need we need “both kinds, Sugar…country and western”! I don’t think we should have just experience based life poetry, or equally poetically perfect lines of words that are inaccessible to any but those who attain a higher light of revelation, I want “four whole fried chickens”. Chuck it in a bucket and put a fried egg on top and don’t step in my bucket. Haute cuisine is overrated. Two day old curry refried is far better. I know there are differing levels of ability to both write and read poetry, but the poetry has to be grounded at some level in an accessible level, otherwise it might as well be written in Klingon.
(If the answer [to the side question] is yes, then I need to go off and form the “unborn poets society” because I have failed at the first hurdle. I want to write poetry, but I am a life long subscriber to being a reject and a failure and general all round, society misfit and actually I’m quite happy in that position because I don’t want to fit in. – I hate PC, media manipulation and spin makes me mad – in particular I think global warming is a load of claptrap, I’m a dissenter of the first order, I don’t want to be in fashion and in step. I don’t feel the need to be an intellectual. I’m hopeless at remembering anything – including names and useless trivia and facts. In short, I’ve had a look at mainstream and decided it is vastly overrated and not for me and willy waving competitions are not as interesting as poetry).
I must now apologise because I am doing a fire and forget post here as I will be offsite for a week. So good news True, you get to have the last say and have time to think up a really good putdown, as by the time I am back the discussion will have moved on. So you win. Enjoy! I will sit here in my wrongness happily enough. (Being a winner smells too much like fitting in the box for my tastes). Alternatively, I lied and when I get back (if I have not been shunned), perhaps I will get a grip and a life and join in the fun by starting a thread entitled “cod piece of the week”.

I used to like reading and writing, but the bastards made me a mod.
Now I have no time for either, I'm too busy pretending I'm god.
Amen,
tectak

[Truerenigma]

I dunno. I have to say I agree. I said "it may be the same truth as the world's, and it may not." I thought my point was that all "good" poetry need not be one or the other, but you have me pretty convinced. I'm actually fairly new at this, hence my need to use so many words to say "some good poetry is a true story, and some isn't, I don't think it matters." Some poems are much better with a little storytelling involved. I never assume the whole poem is a true account, there is most likely some element of fiction. And what about metaphors? Do these all need to be taken literally too?

[milo]

[quote='cidermaid' pid='148778' dateline='1385976663']


Here is a side question:- Do you need to be an egotistical, willy waving, intellectual wannabe with a god complex to be a good poet?

you may not have to be but who wouldn't want to be?

I used to like reading and writing, but the bastards made me a mod.
Now I have no time for either, I'm too busy pretending I'm god.
Amen,
tectak

Mods too busy finding
Both hands atop their head.
Alas, I miss the grinding
Of the bones to make my bread.

---

Is everything you write really about sex or are your readers just perverts?

I thought we settled this already.
And the answer was 'yes'.

[tectak]

[quote='cidermaid' pid='148778' dateline='1385976663']


Here is a side question:- Do you need to be an egotistical, willy waving, intellectual wannabe with a god complex to be a good poet?

you may not have to be but who wouldn't want to be?

I used to like reading and writing, but the bastards made me a mod.
Now I have no time for either, I'm too busy pretending I'm god.
Amen,
tectak

Mods too busy finding
Both hands atop their head.
Alas, I miss the grinding
Of the bones to make my bread.

---

Is everything you write really about sex or are your readers just perverts?

I thought we settled this already.
And the answer was 'yes'.

...all rise...the yeasty one is among us! Pick the porn out of that!
Bread indeed!