Andrey's questions about poems (split from the intro thread)

[AndreyGaganov]

... plus the idea of qualias and abstract thoughts being concretized for understanding.

Can't the qualias and abstract thoughts be expressed and understood without concretization?

Actually, they can't. That's the point of a qualia -- it's a thing you can't transfer without abstracting a thought first, period. Ie, how the color of the hair of the girl you like is red, sure, but as for how red, you can't really say, not without either comparing it to something else (thus, metaphor), or going through the convoluted process of determining the hair's wavelength etc.

This sounds like a strong point in favor of a metaphor - describing the specifics of something using a more colorful language that many can understand, as opposed to the scientific gobbledygook. Sort of like a textual replacement for visual art. I guess my problem is that I'm not much of a fan of visual art. Therein may lie one of my major problems with poetry. I bet a lot of poetry readers here are capable of appreciating visual art as well. I'm pointing this out because lizziep here figured out that I'm looking for something profoundly emotional, not something that is merely descriptive. But hey, they all say you are supposed to experience poetry, so perhaps my expectations are "too high".

OK, so what I'm supposed to work with is (1) the visual aspect and (2) the sonic aspect (both of which I can sense, I am a human being, but not really experience), and not the poet's intent (which is still puzzling).

And the thing about abstract thoughts is that to express them without concretization is to make your thought inaccessible to about 99% of the audience -- with that other 1% getting an avenue to rape your argument in the arse by challenging your definitions.

1) Argument? Once again, I'm not here to argue a point. I'm here to be disabused of some of the notions I've developed about poetry over my lifetime.
2) Weird way to phrase it, but I'll play. (Not that I have a choice.) Who are this 1% and what definitions of mine are they willing to challenge?

[AndreyGaganov]

Really, as literature, and viewing things in a historical context, it's prose that's contrived, seeking to capture everything that can be captured in a semi-immortal form (as if our minds were printers), ...

1) What prose writer would think of our minds as printers? 
2) True, prose in writing is contrived. But what of poetry? Isn't poetry in writing contrived? 

... and attempting to conform the language of conversation to aesthetic purposes.

I can't think of a time when conversational prose was bound to aesthetics. 

In your context, perhaps poetry seems the more contrived --- but, even if everyone didn't agree with that view of history, to say so in a poetry-oriented website is just imprudent.

(The historical aspect just seems to keep coming back like a boomerang.) Historically, poems were passed on from generation to generation. How were metaphors for oral poems chosen back in the day? 

In your context, perhaps poetry seems the more contrived --- but, even if everyone didn't agree with that view of history, to say so in a poetry-oriented website is just imprudent.

How so? There's a reason I said that, the reason being is to present a notion I've developed about poetry over my lifetime that I feel I have to be disabused of.

[Leanne]

A site I often suggest to my students is 13 Different Types of Metaphors.  In basic terms, the metaphor shows us something we don't know via something we do.  And your definitions thus far, as you will find, are very narrow -- essentially, anything that is not literal (i.e. denotation only) is figurative -- metaphorical.  And to your pedantic point earlier:  a simile is one of the kinds of metaphor.  

Perhaps before insulting the many quality poets here whose work has featured elsewhere and who are considered quite respected in the world of poetry, and also those who are posting in an effort to learn from them or else posting equally high quality work without need or desire for publication, and before insulting the many poets whose work may be found in our "poems you love" thread and in other places around the site, you might consider that this site is principally designed for interaction by reading and critiquing the work of others.  In order to become a member, one must first engage in three valuable, considered and insightful critiques and then continue with a reasonable quid pro quo.  This is how one learns:  by immersion, not by demand.

The reason all of your posts here need to be moderated is because you have not followed that basic rule.  We have to this point indulged your curiosity, but as it grows more repetitive and you resist the many suggestions to find things out for yourself, with helpful tips on how to find them, perhaps you might make a decision as to whether you are really seeking some sort of poetry epiphany or if you're just interested in talking yourself out of doing any actual work.  

I would hazard a guess that all of us know at least one person who doesn't like, or doesn't "get" poetry.  There are many different kinds of people in the world, who appreciate different things:  that's diversity.  However, at least most of those people -- knowing that we do quite like poetry ourselves -- have the courtesy not to tell us that our occupation with the art is subordinate in some way to "prose" (which incidentally is just as difficult to define as "poetry", because it did in fact arise out of the versification of the ancients and did not develop in isolation).  

Might I suggest that you do, in fact, read more widely before telling us that in a few days we have failed to convince you that you will ever be an amazing poet when many of us have spent lifetimes immersing ourselves in text and texture, and still discover new things all the time -- or create them for ourselves.  We cannot teach you to be creative.

[Lizzie]

I don't have a choice ... mainly because I hate the feeling of disappointment from being left out of a loop on something. So, with that said, how is giving up on poetry a healthy way to go?

Ok, but you can't just demand that poetry be for you, any more than you can demand that another man's wife be for you. You can't knock on his door every day asking what he likes about her in bed, how she feels compared to other women, where he can find a woman of his own that's exactly like her, demand that he reveal where the island of "Women Exactly Like Her" is located, command him to build a boat to ferry you there and then order him to woo the women on your behalf once you reach the island. That's assuming you don't both die a miserable death at sea.

---

I believe someone here said that you have to read a lot of serious poetry before you come here and bother giving feedback. 

I couldn't disagree with that statement more. I learn about poetry every day by critiquing it, engaging with others about their work, reading what others have to say about the poems. Seeing poetry under construction and trying to help is a great way to learn. Anyone can give poetry feedback. I think it's a myth that only poetry experts can offer useful crit.

[Leanne]

Of course it's a myth. You should, however, read a lot of serious poetry while you're here critiquing other poetry, and in fact read some pretty damn serious poetry here as well. Every poem in our spotlight section, for example, is comparable to the best works being written right now around the world. I can make that statement, because I'm also concurrently reading the best works being written right now around the world.

[QDeathstar]

I've only read whatever poetry they dished out in high school so classes.... At college it was all novels... So... I don't think you have to read a lot of poems to be able to critique a few. Poetry is personal and once you get passed the generic "this is cliche" and the "you spelt cheese wrong" critique, what the reader offers to the author is how the poem hit them. Or missed. It's a feeling, not a fact.

[Lizzie]

I'm pointing this out because lizziep here figured out that I'm looking for something profoundly emotional, not something that is merely descriptive. But hey, they all say you are supposed to experience poetry, so perhaps my expectations are "too high".

Erthona is a mod here, and he recently said something to the effect that poems rarely trigger strong emotional reactions in him. He said that, if they do, he bows to them and brings them fruit and flowers

He's been writing and teaching poetry for years.

[Quixilated]

Andrey,

If a person came to you and said, "Andrey, I want to learn how to like music, but I just don't think it is for me. Please convince me that I do like music."  Would you hand them a book on music theory and argue with them about all the intricate details of music composition?  Or would you play for them all the best music from every genre, and let that person discover through personal experience that music is delightful, and which type of music they like best?   If the person said to you, "oh I listened to rock and roll one time.  Music is terrible.  It is loud and hurts my ears, how can you even think it is a thing of beauty?"  You would think that person a simpleton, for how can they dismiss all music based on one or two songs from one or two genres?  Have they even tried Beethoven or Chopin?  Have they allowed Bach the chance?  This is how you are treating poetry.  You want an argument to explain to you why it is beautiful.  You cannot argue a person into understanding the beauty of either music or of poetry.  They experience it, and they either find it beautiful or they don't.  That is all there is.  

You will never learn to like poetry, or whether you even can like it, by arguing the whys and wherefores.  This is madness and will give you no answers.  Stop arguing, go forth and read poetry.  Read modern poetry.  Read ancient poetry.  Read humor, read tragedy, read whimsy.   Perhaps poetry is not for you, but perhaps it is.  Give it a fair chance.  Do not begin a quest for flaws, begin a quest for beauty.  Tell yourself that you will read all the different types of poetry that you can find until you are able to find ONE poem that you do like.  When you find one poem you like, one poem that moves something in you, that you can say, "now that is a thing of beauty, I would not have said it any other way" then you may return and discuss poetry.  If you read 1000 poems and cannot find a single one with a single thing to like, then poetry is not for you and there is no amount of arguing or explaining that can ever change that.

Please stop trying to understand beauty through argument.  That is not how beauty is conveyed.  I realize you will feel inclined to argue with me on some small point of what I have said.  I will not respond.  I am right.  Now go, your homework is to find one poem that you truly love.  Your arguments have no weight if you cannot.

[Lizzie]

 Do not begin a quest for flaws, begin a quest for beauty. 

Take heed, for our fair and lovely Quix is the wisest of us all

[AndreyGaganov]

... the metaphor shows us something we don't know via something we do.

"something we don't know via something we do" - Is that a way of saying that we are unaware of the consequences of our actions? Did I get it right?

... a simile is one of the kinds of metaphor.

I was never told that.

Perhaps before insulting the many quality poets here whose work ...

OK, ... I did not intend to insult anyone here. If there's anyone here who felt offended by what I said, then it's probably because they mistook what I said to be my ignorant opinion for a point of argument.

... you might consider that this site is principally designed for interaction by reading and critiquing the work of others.

I thought that was just the Poetry Forum, not the Poetry Discussion forum.

In order to become a member, one must first engage in three valuable, considered and insightful critiques and then continue with a reasonable quid pro quo. This is how one learns: by immersion, not by demand.

I thought poetry is about experience, not something as academic as immersion. Now I don't know whom to listen to.

... you resist the many suggestions to find things out for yourself, with helpful tips on how to find them, ...

I told you I will read the poem you gave me the link to. I told lizziep that I'm gonna go out and find the right poetry material for myself.

... perhaps you might make a decision as to whether you are really seeking some sort of poetry epiphany ... .

That's been my agenda all along.

... or if you're just interested in talking yourself out of doing any actual work.

I just want to make sure that I have all the essential knowledge and understanding of the precepts of poetry before I crash and burn with misguided critiques. Never before was I told that I have to perform labor to comprehend something that is supposed to be natural, human.

However, at least most of those people ... have the courtesy not to tell us that our occupation with the art is subordinate in some way to "prose" ... .

Oh, Jesus. I don't remember passing this as a dogma.

Might I suggest that you do, in fact, read more widely before telling us that in a few days we have failed to convince you that you will ever be an amazing poet when many of us have spent lifetimes immersing ourselves in text and texture, and still discover new things all the time -- or create them for ourselves. We cannot teach you to be creative.

There appears to be more to poetry than just reading, aloud or not, however widely.

[Leanne]

Maybe if you stopped thinking of reading as an academic chore and started thinking of it as most of us do -- as a pleasurable experience -- you'd have better luck.

[AndreyGaganov]

I don't have a choice ... mainly because I hate the feeling of disappointment from being left out of a loop on something. So, with that said, how is giving up on poetry a healthy way to go?

Ok, but you can't just demand that poetry be for you, any more than you can demand that another man's wife be for you. You can't knock on his door every day asking what he likes about her in bed, how she feels compared to other women, where he can find a woman of his own that's exactly like her, demand that he reveal where the island of "Women Exactly Like Her" is located, command him to build a boat to ferry you there and then order him to woo the women on your behalf once you reach the island. That's assuming you don't both die a miserable death at sea.

Well, I was never told to think of poetry-reading experience as something that isn't for sharing (for some reason). Is that what you are saying? That every poetry-appreciating reader can build a personal relationship with a poem and is not supposed to share it? 

I believe someone here said that you have to read a lot of serious poetry before you come here and bother giving feedback. 

I couldn't disagree with that statement more. I learn about poetry every day by critiquing it, engaging with others about their work, reading what others have to say about the poems. Seeing poetry under construction and trying to help is a great way to learn. Anyone can give poetry feedback. I think it's a myth that only poetry experts can offer useful crit.

OK, but what about poetry readers who just read poetry and do not observe the construction of a poem - can they learn anything about poetry? And if they can, what do they learn about it? Or does the reader have to be something of a poet him-/herself?

[AndreyGaganov]

Of course it's a myth.  You should, however, read a lot of serious poetry while you're here critiquing other poetry, and in fact read some pretty damn serious poetry here as well.  Every poem in our spotlight section, for example, is comparable to the best works being written right now around the world.  I can make that statement, because I'm also concurrently reading the best works being written right now around the world.

Duly noted.

[AndreyGaganov]

I've only read whatever poetry they dished out in high school so classes.... At college it was all novels... So... I don't think you have to read a lot of poems to be able to critique a few.  Poetry is personal and once you get passed the generic "this is cliche" and the "you spelt cheese wrong" critique, what the reader offers to the author is how the poem hit them. Or missed. It's a feeling, not a fact.

So, I do have to approach a poem like it's a song. It's a take-it-or-leave-it relationship. Right?

[AndreyGaganov]

OK, now you guys are really confusing me.

I'm pointing this out because lizziep here figured out that I'm looking for something profoundly emotional, not something that is merely descriptive. But hey, they all say you are supposed to experience poetry, so perhaps my expectations are "too high".

Erthona is a mod here, and he recently said something to the effect that poems rarely trigger strong emotional reactions in him. He said that, if they do, he bows to them and brings them fruit and flowers

He's been writing and teaching poetry for years.

OK, this totally contradicts what RiverNotch had previously said. He said that the practical advantage metaphors give to poetry over prose is getting the emotional point across. And yet someone who spent years dealing with poetry rarely finds poems triggering a strong emotional reaction in him. 

From this I can only conclude that metaphors can only be used to succinctly describe something in a way you can't describe it with something non-poetic.

[Lizzie]

OK, but what about poetry readers who just read poetry and do not observe the construction of a poem - can they learn anything about poetry? And if they can, what do they learn about it? Or does the reader have to be something of a poet him-/herself?

You can observe them under construction as you follow people's posts, the subsequent crit, and then the revisions. Yes, it does help to be a poetry writer, but it's not necessary I don't think. I'm a much better reader than writer.

If you're concerned about doing your crits "wrong," you can't really go wrong unless you just say, "sounds great, don't change anything!" (which isn't really constructive) or if you critique the poet instead of the poem (like, I can't believe how lazy you were with this poem!). You're always welcome to crit my work to get your three out of the way -- I promise I won't get offended about anything. I always welcome responses of all levels, as long as they're true to how the person sees things.

A critical step to discovering what you DO like in poetry is deciding what you DON'T like. And, it's always ok to say that you don't like a poem, as long as you tell the person why in a constructive manner.

---

Well, I was never told to think of poetry-reading experience as something that isn't for sharing (for some reason). Is that what you are saying? That every poetry-appreciating reader can build a personal relationship with a poem and is not supposed to share it? 

Ok, well you've correctly identified the fact that sometimes I have trouble with precision in my metaphors! See, you're critiquing already

It's not that it's inappropriate to tell someone else your experience, we do it all the time in crits. My point was that each experience is unique, and I can't give you mine. And I can't take you to the place to find your own, you have to find it yourself. That's all.

But, you've said several times that you intend to do more reading and studying, so I guess it's a moot point in the end. I'd suggest letting this discussion alone for a while, as soon as it winds down. Just focus on getting your crits in, read poetry like it's an addiction and read all types. But, you said that you were going to, so I trust that you will.

I guess I just feel like we're being asked to read your mind and spontaneously produce the ultimate poem for you here right on the spot that will blow you away in just the right way to justify our whole poetic enterprise. Feels unfair and impossible.

---

Of course it's a myth.  You should, however, read a lot of serious poetry while you're here critiquing other poetry, and in fact read some pretty damn serious poetry here as well.  Every poem in our spotlight section, for example, is comparable to the best works being written right now around the world.  I can make that statement, because I'm also concurrently reading the best works being written right now around the world.

Duly noted.

Yes, the Spotlighting the Hogs is one of the most enjoyable sections around here, and we couldn't be prouder of our talented friends here

The Spotlighting the Hogs, Critic Edition is great too if you're curious about what they're really looking for in terms of great crit. I love reading through both sections.

[ellajam]

Brie.

Brie? Why? Cheese is cheese. All cheese provides nutrition and having all these flavors is nothing more than a triumph of flavor over sustenance. Obscuring nutrition behind a mishmash of herbs and spices.

You can't just lump flavors of cheese and styles of poetry together. You can taste cheese, you can sense it with your taste buds. How can you experience poetry in any style?

Experience a poem is exactly what I do. Sure, I just read plenty of them but the "good" ones ( which can be different for each of us) touch every part of me: Thought, emotion, reflex, joy, fear, grief, play. They stick with me the same way I carry my other experiences, I feel lucky to have come in contact with them.

I saw in a later post that you said we were confusing you with our different views. That's because we are individual people, people who have thought about poetry and come to our own individual conclusions. That's the beauty of the Pigpen, seeing things from multiple points of view and being pushed to think about the poem or topic to figure out my own. It's like spinning a cut stone and seeing it from all different angles. Fun and intriguing.

[Achebe]

Brie? Why? Cheese is cheese. All cheese provides nutrition and having all these flavors is nothing more than a triumph of flavor over sustenance. Obscuring nutrition behind a mishmash of herbs and spices.

You can't just lump flavors of cheese and styles of poetry together. You can taste cheese, you can sense it with your taste buds. How can you experience poetry in any style?

Good grief, what part of 'sensory perception' don't you understand?
Reading poetry stimulates certain areas in our brain - the so-called Broca's region, associated with language, as well as other areas in the right hemisphere.
Tasting cheese stimulates our taste buds, that then activates certain areas of the brain.
How is it different than tasting cheese?
And brie is terrible, you should only eat Danish blue.

[AndreyGaganov]

Andrey,

If a person came to you and said, "Andrey, I want to learn how to like music, but I just don't think it is for me. Please convince me that I do like music."

One thing that doesn't make sense about these words is the interest in poetry and the defeatist attitude conflated 2-in-1. Do you want to explore or not? Pick a team and play. The other thing that doesn't make sense is a plea for an attempt to establish that which obviously cannot be established. So, I really don't know what that person wants from me. 

If what the person is asking for is to teach him to learn to appreciate music, I'd have to say: "You get out of music only that which your brain does. There are no precepts. There are no rules. There are no puzzles. There are no expectations. Certain things about music choose you, and you can listen to it however you want ... unless it's jazz, because what I heard about it is that you have to really listen to jazz to appreciate it ... unless it's Alice Coltrane, who can really pull you in. I guess that's why I'm not a jazz guy."

I would love to try and explain a song or an instrumental piece or an experiment to someone (I want to welcome, not turn someone away), just as I'd love it for someone to explain to me why an author chose these metaphors for his poem.

Anyway, let's just plow on through. 

Andrey,

If the person said to you, "oh I listened to rock and roll one time.  Music is terrible.  It is loud and hurts my ears, how can you even think it is a thing of beauty?"

Then I would say "If it hurts your ears, turn it down. ... And who have you been listening to? Because there are so many different flavors of rock n' roll."

You would think that person a simpleton, for how can they dismiss all music based on one or two songs from one or two genres? Have they even tried Beethoven or Chopin?  Have they allowed Bach the chance?  This is how you are treating poetry.

Are you saying there is poetry that doesn't rely on sound, rhythm, irony, and cryptic metaphors?

You want an argument to explain to you why it is beautiful. You cannot argue a person into understanding the beauty of either music or of poetry. They experience it, and they either find it beautiful or they don't. That is all there is. 

Not an argument. A revelation. Besides, if I remember correctly, arguments are not allowed in here. Only discussions.

You will never learn to like poetry, ...

Who's to say that? (As I said before: I do not take defeatism kindly.)

... or whether you even can like it, by arguing the whys and wherefores. 

I'm not arguing the why's or the wherefore's; I'm inquiring about them. 

Do not begin a quest for flaws, begin a quest for beauty.

It's not that I'm on a quest for flaws; it's just that the things that I personally perceive as flaws are just right in my face.

...

After god knows how many minutes of pondering over this one, here's another question: would you say there are different kinds of beauty in poetry? Are you saying there's more to it than just rhythm and sound? Let's entertain the idea that I should express complete disregard for Randall Jarrell's intent for "The Death of the Ball Turret Gunner" (since a poem is not about the poet's intent). That means that I shouldn't care what the poem is about. That means that all I'm left with is the text and its rhythms and sounds. Is the reader's objective to only extract rhythms and sounds? - goes my second question. 

Tell yourself that you will read all the different types of poetry that you can find until you are able to find ONE poem that you do like.  When you find one poem you like, one poem that moves something in you, that you can say, "now that is a thing of beauty, I would not have said it any other way" then you may return and discuss poetry.

If you read 1000 poems and cannot find a single one with a single thing to like, then poetry is not for you ...

For my own good I'll just pretend you did not write that. 

Please stop trying to understand beauty through argument. That is not how beauty is conveyed. 

(I listen to music; I have an idea of how beauty can be conveyed within a musical, not a lyrical, paradigm.)
I'm not trying to understand beauty through argument. Research and inquiry, but not argument. I just want to know the ways in which beauty can be manifested. Some say it's the metaphors, right? You can use a metaphor to describe something beautiful, right? That means the beauty is not in the metaphor itself, but in the object of the metaphor, right? Someone said: to get an emotional point across; but it turns out there's someone who's been working with poetry for years and did not extract a great deal of emotion, so I'm lost on that one. Now, some say it's the rhythm and sounds of the text alone, right? It sounds to me like poetry is kind of like music, only you have less of a chance enjoying it because there are no instruments that can produce pleasing sounds, there is no singer with a great voice, and ... there is no singing. I'm basically down to two dimensions only - rhythm and sound, right? Is there a poem that can spoil the reader with its rhythms and sounds? 

Please stop trying to understand beauty through argument.   I realize you will feel inclined to argue with me on some small point of what I have said.  I will not respond.  I am right.  Now go, your homework is to find one poem that you truly love.  Your arguments have no weight if you cannot.

They have no weight because, as I've said before, there are no arguments. As per the homework assignment, ... I'm on it.

[AndreyGaganov]

Maybe if you stopped thinking of reading as an academic chore and started thinking of it as most of us do -- as a pleasurable experience -- you'd have better luck.

That means that, once again, I have to forget about the poet's intent (can't believe that again I'm typing something that makes no sense), that I don't have to look for a meaning (which does not seem  to be the case with Jarrell's poem), and embrace the sounds and rhythms of every poem I come across. 

So, I guess that my objective should be to record myself reading a poem, listen to the recording again and again, and repeat the steps with every poem. Right? Listening to these recordings is going to be tough because I've heard my speaking voice many times before and I still hate it. Do you think I should get a different reader?