|
Jenifer
|
 |
« on: July 06, 2009, 01:37:06 AM » |
|
Recently, I found myself disagreeing with something Father Luke had to say on a thread in poetry. This thread to be specific: http://literarymary.com/forum/index.php?topic=10835.0I've been experimenting with
an objectivity.
I did this.
They did that.
She, he, him, the postman's dog...
If a pome has something to say,
metaphorically -- and why write posey
without metaphor? -- then write the thing
and leave the ego out of the fucker.
My original response was this:
leaving the ego out, while popular among a certain set and certainly trendy, has always been overrated as far as i'm concerned.
leave the sentimentality out, sure.
but each poem, being unique, requires it's own unique formula. poetry is not math.
and it is possible for the poem itself to be the metaphor.
we're going to have fun here. i can tell.
Dictionary.com defines 'ego' as this: e⋅go
/ˈigoʊ, ˈɛgoʊ/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ee-goh, eg-oh] Show IPA
Use ego in a Sentence
–noun, plural e⋅gos.
1. the “I” or self of any person; a person as thinking, feeling, and willing, and distinguishing itself from the selves of others and from objects of its thought.
2. Psychoanalysis. the part of the psychic apparatus that experiences and reacts to the outside world and thus mediates between the primitive drives of the id and the demands of the social and physical environment.
3. egotism; conceit; self-importance: Her ego becomes more unbearable each day.
4. self-esteem or self-image; feelings: Your criticism wounded his ego.
5. (often initial capital letter) Philosophy.
a. the enduring and conscious element that knows experience.
b. Scholasticism. the complete person comprising both body and soul.
6. Ethnology. a person who serves as the central reference point in the study of organizational and kinship relationships. If, what Father Luke is referring to is the removal of the 'I' from work to make it better, I must disagree. I believe that good poetry lets the poem write itself, using whichever devices fit the particular poem at that particular time. To consider that a piece will automatically be better if the ego is removed is to reduce poetry to a formula. Poetry is not math, although some math can be considered poetry. It should be noticed that I may choose to edit the nature of this debate if I have somehow misunderstood Father Luke's intentions with his statement. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Father Luke
|
|
« Reply #1 on: July 06, 2009, 01:47:15 AM » |
|
That's part of it. From Chucky P's website: "First-person narration, for all its immediacy and power, becomes
a liability if your reader can't identify with your narrator." Look through my writing. Rarely will you see me denote currency -- unless I am specifically addressing an American. A few coins Some paper money Rather than a few bucks or fifty cents. Like that. If my writing is to be accepted, and understood, everyone must first understand it. That is not to say I am pandering, but how may times have you read slang you didn't understand? Hey, mate. I was chin waggin' with a couple of blokes about
the sheila, and he asked for a quid and I said I have a
ha'penny and. . .You see? Real words. Simple words. Those work best. But here is another thing to think about. For all the posturing that poets do, and writers, I don't want to hear about your day. There was a time girls ran crying to their mothers when someone stole their journals and read them. They were kept under lock and key. Now, every fucktard and her brother has a blawg, and wants people to read it. I won't. That's what I mean by keeping ego out of writing. I want to read well written work, not how someone cleaned out the cat box today. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"The castigation of fools is, of course, an ancient and honorable task of writers and, unless very poorly done, an enterprise that will usually entertain those who behold it." ~ Richard Mitchell |
|
|
|
Jenifer
|
|
« Reply #2 on: July 06, 2009, 01:56:41 AM » |
|
I do believe, in a way, you are pandering though. If a character is American, I want to know about their experiences as an American, not a generic person with a generic life. This is one of the reasons I don't have trouble with hip hop or rap. People tend to say oh but they say things like this or they use slang like that and oh I don't even understand what they're saying. I just cannot identify. It's not the job of your character to make themselves easier to identify, but to show you the world through their eyes. Because in the end, as writers, that's all we have anymore - the personal. Everything. has already been done. It's also one of the reasons concrete imagery is essential. I will say there is a time and a place for removal of the 'I'. There is a time and a place to be generic, but each and every piece calls for consideration of that on its own. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Father Luke
|
|
« Reply #3 on: July 06, 2009, 02:02:59 AM » |
|
I do believe, in a way, you are pandering though.
If a character is American, I want to know about their experiences as an American
Look through my writing. Rarely will you see me denote
currency -- unless I am specifically addressing an American. I addressed that. You are misunderstanding me.
This is one of the reasons I don't have trouble with hip hop or rap. People tend to say oh but they say things like this or they use slang like that and oh I don't even understand what they're saying. I just cannot identify. It's not the job of your character to make themselves easier to identify, but to show you the world through their eyes.
Because in the end, as writers, that's all we have anymore - the personal.
Well, sure. Imagine a "generic" Huck Fin. It would suck. And it was filled with both colloquialisms, and dialect. My point is that I don't want to read little boys and little gurlz writing "What I did on my summer vacation". At least not all the time. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"The castigation of fools is, of course, an ancient and honorable task of writers and, unless very poorly done, an enterprise that will usually entertain those who behold it." ~ Richard Mitchell |
|
|
|
Ġakbu
|
|
« Reply #4 on: July 06, 2009, 02:05:24 AM » |
|
There was a time girls ran crying to their mothers
when someone stole their journals and read them.
They were kept under lock and key. Now, every fucktard
and her brother has a blawg, and wants people to read it.
I won't.
That's what I mean by keeping ego out of writing.
I want to read well written work, not how someone
cleaned out the cat box today.
I do agree with you Father Luke. This biographical-confessional movement has become the staple I believe, in recent years. I think personal expression is important in poetry; whether one wants to or not, one doesshow his concerns, or thoughts, ideas, even if they do not relate to his external experiences in Poetry. One can use the 'I', in poetry, but one should be careful how to use it. e.e. cummings wrote a poem using the 'I', or should I say 'i': i thank You God for most this amazing
day:for the leaping greenly spirits of trees
and a blue true dream of sky;and for everything
which is natural which is infinite which is yes
(i who have died am alive again today,
and this is the sun's birthday;this is the birth
day of life and of love and wings:and of the gay
great happening illimitably earth)
how should tasting touching hearing seeing
breathing any--lifted from the no
of allnothing--human merely being
doubt unimaginable You?
(now the ears of my ears awake and
now the eyes of my eyes are opened)but people can relate to that spiritual experience of his, since it is of a universal nature. One has to be very powerful with words, very talented with phrasing and blessed with a deep and fertile county of imaginatitave strength to write poems which are very much personal, confessional and yet are good poems and great poems, for example Walt Whitman. Besides the obvious fact of his skills as a poet, having widely-read many of the old masters (something very absent in most modern writers), he had way of phrasing the ordinary into something special. It is the diary-pieces that we must avoid above all else, if this means that they have no poetic meat (rotting or fresh) hanging to them. Preferably the poem has calves, loins, arms, hands, a face and eyes and hair and everything, but it must have some meat. Many people do get into poetry at first I suppose through these diary-pieces. What worries me is that most remain stuck on that, since it's easy to read and easy to forget; and in this unthinking world, a chance for one to ponder is a minute wasted from the suburbian delicacies of small hands and small reaches. Be confessional if you wish, but do flesh it so with something higher than your personal trials. Ġakbu l-Malti |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Jenifer
|
|
« Reply #5 on: July 06, 2009, 02:25:21 AM » |
|
A poet who calls himself or herself a poet will be capable of writing all types of pieces, including those that are autobiographical. Just because a piece appears autobiographical, by the way, does not mean it is. To assume a writer is writing autobiographically is making a serious mistake as a reader. One should never assume that the the author is referring to themselves. If this were true, many of us would be murderers or rapists. There is a time and a place for 'I' in all writing. I think what both of you are arguing is that it should be done correctly. There is a difference between not doing something at all and doing something correctly. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Father Luke
|
|
« Reply #6 on: July 06, 2009, 02:33:54 AM » |
|
I think what both of you are arguing is that it should be done correctly. I am. But I think you are, too, Jenifer. If it's well done, then the ego is not involved. The voice becomes a narrator, or a character, and not an ego extension. "I was visiting my Aunt Sally, and I saw some flowers. They were pretty. And she has a cat." Aunt Sally's house has a garden where I play. Flowers grow there.
Pansies, with their funny thick eyebrows, and big mustaches. The cat
sometimes buries dead mice there, which Aunt Sally faints upon finding.etc., etc., etc.  Ego in Writing (click the picture) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"The castigation of fools is, of course, an ancient and honorable task of writers and, unless very poorly done, an enterprise that will usually entertain those who behold it." ~ Richard Mitchell |
|
|
|
Jenifer
|
|
« Reply #7 on: July 06, 2009, 12:39:03 PM » |
|
It appears to me that the second contains just as much ego as the first, with less use of I. What I see you doing is incorporating the use of concrete imagery and also involving a lot of sensory imagery. And then including a photo for me to click. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Father Luke
|
|
« Reply #8 on: July 06, 2009, 01:01:03 PM » |
|
And I see you leaving ego out of writing. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"The castigation of fools is, of course, an ancient and honorable task of writers and, unless very poorly done, an enterprise that will usually entertain those who behold it." ~ Richard Mitchell |
|
|
|
Tobacco
|
|
« Reply #9 on: July 06, 2009, 10:01:47 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Y crybaby me ome crybaby me ast
|
|
|
|
Jenifer
|
|
« Reply #10 on: July 06, 2009, 10:40:57 PM » |
|
Using I is a device the same as all others. No device should ever be used to often that it becomes a crutch. But there are instances when the Capital I is important for intimacy's sake, a direct relation, thus reflecting that the thing the writer is writing about is very important to the writer or something they relate to or want to make sure it is reflected in a content that is specifically related to them. Alliteration is fun when used correctly or can even be used for purposes that aren't fun but necessary. But any author who overuses alliteration will become tiresome or elementary sounding to their reader. Devices are devices. When a writer begins to write off one device or another they begin limiting themselves for the sake of what they feel is important sounding or whether they feel they will be received as a professional by their readers. The minute the writer begins selling out what is true is the moment they aren't writing for the right reason. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Tobacco
|
|
« Reply #11 on: July 06, 2009, 10:47:57 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Y crybaby me me bla crybaby me me bla
|
|
|
|
Father Luke
|
|
« Reply #12 on: July 06, 2009, 11:33:18 PM » |
|
Rhyming went out of style... and in came I, You, and Free Verse. I admire those who do it well. Rhyming. Poe did it well. So did Lewis Carrol. More recently Shel Silverstein. But you see? There isn't a whole of I, Me, Mine in those works. And rhyming, for Jenifer's benefit, isn't a trick. It's skill. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"The castigation of fools is, of course, an ancient and honorable task of writers and, unless very poorly done, an enterprise that will usually entertain those who behold it." ~ Richard Mitchell |
|
|
|
Jenifer
|
|
« Reply #13 on: July 07, 2009, 01:28:38 AM » |
|
The Raven by Edgar Allan Poe First Published in 1845 Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered, weak and weary, Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore, While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping, As of someone gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door. " 'Tis some visitor," I muttered, "tapping at my chamber door; Only this, and nothing more." Ah, distinctly I remember, it was in the bleak December, And each separate dying ember wrought its ghost upon the floor. Eagerly I wished the morrow; vainly I had sought to borrow From my books surcease of sorrow, sorrow for the lost Lenore,. For the rare and radiant maiden whom the angels name Lenore, Nameless here forevermore. And the silken sad uncertain rustling of each purple curtain Thrilled me---filled me with fantastic terrors never felt before; So that now, to still the beating of my heart, I stood repeating, " 'Tis some visitor entreating entrance at my chamber door, Some late visitor entreating entrance at my chamber door. This it is, and nothing more." Presently my soul grew stronger; hesitating then no longer, "Sir," said I, "or madam, truly your forgiveness I implore; But the fact is, I was napping, and so gently you came rapping, And so faintly you came tapping, tapping at my chamber door, That I scarce was sure I heard you." Here I opened wide the door;--- Darkness there, and nothing more. etc. etc. etc. point proven. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Father Luke
|
|
« Reply #14 on: July 07, 2009, 01:32:11 AM » |
|
That's part of it.
"First-person narration, for all its immediacy and power, becomes
a liability if your reader can't identify with your narrator."
But here is another thing to think about.
For all the posturing that poets do, and writers,
I don't want to hear about your day.
There was a time girls ran crying to their mothers
when someone stole their journals and read them.
They were kept under lock and key. Now, every fucktard
and her brother has a blawg, and wants people to read it.
I won't.
That's what I mean by keeping ego out of writing.
I want to read well written work, not how someone
cleaned out the cat box today.
Not exactly proven, Jenifer. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"The castigation of fools is, of course, an ancient and honorable task of writers and, unless very poorly done, an enterprise that will usually entertain those who behold it." ~ Richard Mitchell |
|
|
|
Conversation and Pie
