12-01-2013, 01:05 PM
When I was at San Jose State in the 80s, my poertry class was taught by Bob Hass. (I once referred to him that way to a poet named Aaron who was aghast and said "You call him Bob?!" 'Um... yeah, that's his name.' Robert Hass, poet laureate of the United States.
Anyway, my first piece came out of some reservoir of poetry I had filled by hanging out in the library in high school instead of on a sports field, and consequently, my 'voice' was a composite of what I had read, and not mine at all. It was ... bad. Well crafted I thought, but not authentic. I thought poetry had to rhyme, be metered, be structured, etc., because I had gorged on 19th century English writers in the library and that's all I knew. (Raised in the 60s, I also had George Carlin's 'Hair' in my head and had to avoid that trap... "Fred Astaire got no hair, nor does a bear, or a chocolate eclair...")
After readig my first piece to the class, Bob said: "...try to write in your own century."
Good advice. So if I can suggest anything to help, I would say, untether yourself from your notions of what a poem should look like, and think more about what it should sound like. I know, counterintuitive, sinc eyou worked so hard on rhymed endings, but I think you are operating with your eyes and not your ears or your tongue. Poetry is music in the mouth for people who can't sing (or they'd be songwriters instead of poets). Try something that doesn't rhyme -- it's liberating, I swear, and legitimate -- and see where you end up. Look at something in the room and describe it. Simple. I say "something" because I want to see you describe ONE thing. Your poem is heavy with generalities that never quite resolve, so I want to see you talk about one concrete thing. Please. Thank you.
Anyway, my first piece came out of some reservoir of poetry I had filled by hanging out in the library in high school instead of on a sports field, and consequently, my 'voice' was a composite of what I had read, and not mine at all. It was ... bad. Well crafted I thought, but not authentic. I thought poetry had to rhyme, be metered, be structured, etc., because I had gorged on 19th century English writers in the library and that's all I knew. (Raised in the 60s, I also had George Carlin's 'Hair' in my head and had to avoid that trap... "Fred Astaire got no hair, nor does a bear, or a chocolate eclair...")
After readig my first piece to the class, Bob said: "...try to write in your own century."
Good advice. So if I can suggest anything to help, I would say, untether yourself from your notions of what a poem should look like, and think more about what it should sound like. I know, counterintuitive, sinc eyou worked so hard on rhymed endings, but I think you are operating with your eyes and not your ears or your tongue. Poetry is music in the mouth for people who can't sing (or they'd be songwriters instead of poets). Try something that doesn't rhyme -- it's liberating, I swear, and legitimate -- and see where you end up. Look at something in the room and describe it. Simple. I say "something" because I want to see you describe ONE thing. Your poem is heavy with generalities that never quite resolve, so I want to see you talk about one concrete thing. Please. Thank you.