Footenotes and author's notes etc.

[billy]

this thread has probably already been done but we've had a lot of new guys on the site since then so..

what are people thought's on footnotes etc.

[Todd]

I did them in one poem. I think they generally detract and try to accomplish things that aren't being done in the poem. I think they can be used like a sort of bibliography for people who want to study more, but studying isn't why I read poetry.

[Wildcard]

I always ignore footnotes (if I can) because I just find them distracting. If I can't read it several times and get the meaning then maybe it just isn't a poem for me.

Then again, what do I know? :p

[billy]

i could use em when it's one of those poems that have a lot of technical stuff in them but in general I like to see the thing myself. (i refuse to answer marks question )

[addy]

Depends on the footnotes, I guess? In a translated poem, for instance, they may sometimes be necessary to provide some context.

I bought this book of poetry once, and the author had a few pieces that were basically footnotes.... the footnotes themselves were the meat of the poem. I suppose it was meant to be experimental, but it wasn't really my cup of tea .

[cidermaid]

Hi, I guess as one of the relative newcomers I suppose I should join this one.
So I'm going to relate my experience and resulting conclusion here.
Before I joined this site I would not have given any thought or hesitation to adding a footnote or author's explanation.
I had never really thought that much about "my reader" in terms of why they might be reading poetry in the first place.
So if I wrote a poem that even I as the author, thought was a little cryptic or out there, then I would add a note to "help" the reader get it.
On my recent journey of poetic discovery, that is called Pigpen forum, I have come to the conclusion that my motive to write the note was rooted in self justification and a desire to be liked or at least understood and that in part I was using my poetry to find a side door entry into being popular (something I've never been) My eureka moment came when I had a knee jerk reaction to a perfectly innocent comment (nothing to do with a poem even). I came to the conclusion that to take my poetry forward I had to learn to get over it (people liking me or not) and write because I liked it and further more to write a poem that others can choose to like or not based on the subject, style and the poetic art employed to write it.
In other words I have come to the conclusion that a footnote or author's note should largely not be given unless it is asked for. When I write a poem it should not be about whether people like me based on my poem or the sub text within the poem of my life story, It should just be about writing the best poem I can on any given subject and in what ever poetic form I have chosen to set this.
As I said in my knee jerk post..."all I have to do now is stop being a wuss".....a common behaviour practice of all us zero confidence, rejected, unloved, un-wanted and despised want-to-be poets out there. (My self included)
If I can wander off subject for a few words, my personal advise (derived from the above) is, try not to let your poetry be hijacked by your history, start writing a new history for yourself. Get out of the box that others have placed you in and allow the poet within to get a word in edgeways. It's scary but fun!

---

Oh and my apologies if the word wuss has offended any of you. Please feel free to insert whichever word you feel best suits your behaviour pattern. We all compensate and react to life from our past experience of circumstances - which are as manifoldly different as there are number of stars in the sky. This is good news. You (we all are) unique and can write unique poems that will be countless in number and all as different as snowflakes.

[billy]

you're no longer a newb and i'm glad we have members who treat the site as it's supposed to treated like you do.
back on topic.
i'm pretty much in agreement with what you said. i think some use a footnote in order to give the poem a better chance at being understood and it's understandable. the thing is they (the reader) are more often than not letting personal asides or something they know nothing of affect their judgement, instead f only thinking about the poem. it's a bit like buying a car because the salesman tells you it's a great little runner.

[rowens]

Context is the issue. If a poem is a certain kind of gun, the talk about the poem is how to use the gun. I don't think the meaning of a poem has to be directly clear. "Symbolist" poetry, for example; it's not about what the words logically mean, but the effects of the feelings (or multitude of effects and feelings) behind the words that carry you to another kind of meaning. Or in the case of someone like Anne Sexton, while many of her poems are clear, some of them lean on personal experiences that might not be familiar to the reader. In a case like that, a person is in danger, or at least feels themselves in danger, of losing their self, losing their sanity: and so they use poetry to keep a grip on who they are: as autobiography is just as difficult to write (and just as 'fictional') as fiction, or fantasy. Of if someone says "Muslim", are they using it in the context of Islam, or in the context of how many equate "Muslim" with "terrorist"? And the person writing the poem, which context are they using? and in what context are they using that context? Sometimes it's either/or in context, sometimes it's both/and. Plus what the reader brings to the experience.

[Keith]

My words are quite basic so I've not really thought about trying to explain things, I guess I expect the reader to get it and if they dont whatever they got is theirs and I like that even more. So getting to the point if there is a footnote or authors note I would in the main, ignore it and be happy to get what I see or feel, of course this can change with further reads and this is also what I love about poetry.

[arbil_poieo]

Like TimeOnMyHands mentioned sometimes it's better for a writer to allow the reader to make their own meaning or interpretation. I don't write footnotes because it does spoil the read because to me it's fun to allow readers to draw their own conclusion. It gives me more insight into my writing and it helps me grow with my writing and it's fun as a reader to draw up a conclusion because it does contribute to critical thinking and allows a reader/writer connection and it creates a discussion that you can't get when footnotes are available to tell you what it is.

[billy]

i think arbil makes a good point. in some ways the footnote affects how we learn, peoples feedback is different that what it would have been and because of this the poet maybe assuming the poem is good when it's just personal. one thing i've notced is that often, the footnote has better content than the poem it's explaining, i often think "make that the poem"

[Leanne]

one thing i've notced is that often, the footnote has better content than the poem it's explaining, i often think "make that the poem"

You wouldn't believe how many times I've said exactly that!

I am generally anti-footnote, just as I'm anti-explanation, unless it's a very specific piece of knowledge that isn't necessarily google-able -- for instance, some obscure colloquialism. Not that we have those in Australia

[arbil_poieo]

I've actually never noticed that a footnotes content is better until you both pointed it out. I wonder why that is.