Authors' commentsThe great majority of "author's comments" on a posted work consist of a "." - which is, to say the least, not very illuminating. It's possible, of course, that the creator is saying: "I want this to stand on its own, without any extra help from me" - and in a few cases that would be entirely appropriate. I've found, when posting my own work, that there are some whose reading really ought not to be supported by prompting or special pleading.
However, this is not a forum just for the general public; it's a space fo artists (however conceived) and one of its central features is the availability of comment, of ideas exchanged. That being so, aspects of the creative process which would not be appropriate in, say, a published book of poems become entirely appropriate here.
I have elsewhere mentioned the principle put forward by Dante in the Vita Nuova, where each poem is followed by a prose explication. While Dante's precise model - stating the circumstances which led to writing the poem, then laying out its struture and metaphoric intent - may not be one to follow closely, it still remains for me a very persuasive principle. The space provided on DA for "author's comments" therefore becomes a space ideal for this sort of explication (if not exegesis).
So how about it, people? Do you think it's worth more thought? I know that writing such comments isn't easy: trying to say something intelligent, in a couple of sentences, about a work which may be quite complex can be a challenge. However, if approached in the right way I think it might be an activity which adds to the work.
Even if a work needs to be read/seen "naked", without the props offered by an author's comment, it is still an important point that the artist should make. Without wishing to get into the subversion of text, I think it would be useful to say at least "No comment from me" - making it clear that the work is on its own. Otherwise, with the "." school, one is left to wonder if the creator merely couldn't be bothered to decide on that point.
As far as I know, Dante's experiment has never been repeated in a published work or poetry. But the different sort of space which is ofered by DA might be a good place to try it again. I plan to give it a go myself, and I'll be interested to see what sort of a fist others make of it too. No more ".", okay?
How are you?
However: don't hold your breath.
--
Eih bennek, eih blavek
Many thanks !
Sam.
I very much appreciate it. I'll read through them again after my final exams in November, and reply to them all separately, I just wanted to say thankyou now.
Also, thankyou very much for the favourites on Secretly Psychotic and Addicted to the Pain, they, like the critique, are very much appreciated.
--Lizzi
--
Walk behind me and I may not lead.
Walk in front and I may not follow.
Just walk beside me and be my friend.
The favourites are there because I want to show your work off to anyone watching me; they are poems with wonderful potential.
Good luck with your exams!
--
Eih bennek, eih blavek
you commented on my girlfriends deviation today called "do you see the rainbow" she's living_on_a_cloud. My name is Haydn and I am the soldier_of_light. I was just curious to know whether you would be interested or not in looking at some of my poetry which I have posted. You're critique on "do you see the rainbow" was just awesome and I would love some feedback like that on my own work. I hope you have a great day and I hope to talk to you soon
--
The best confidence builder is experience
I'm always ready to comment on other people's work (I like the sound of my own voice, I guess!), just as I enjoy receiving informed critique on mine. Every poet likes getting comments on the lines of "Wow, nice one!" - but that doesn't help much towards the poet's development generally, or improvement of the particular poem under scrutiny. And there's always some room for improvement.
I found "do you see the rainbow" quite by accident, just browsing throught recent postings in the Villanelle section. An interesting poem, with a lot of potential which hasn't been fully developed yet - which is why I thought it was worth offering some comments. Some of the crap out there is beyond any hope of saving (so I don't even bother), but there is a lot of promising stuff too.
I wouldn't rate my critique on "do you see the rainbow" as awesome. It's mostly pretty obvious things which seem to have been overlooked in the rush. It helps that I've been writing poetry on and off for about 40 years - and the first 30 of that was pretty low down the learning curve - so I've crystallised some thoughts about poetry that my teachers never got around to saying.
I'll be taking a look at some of your other work - and your girlfriend's too - but I warn you that I'm getting old enough to be approaching the "crusty old pedant" definition. Some of my criticism comes from my rather traditionalist view of what constitutes "poetry" - but for anyone who wants to be (or become) taken seriously as a working poet, my ideas will hopefully form at least the basis for some interesting arguments!
Catch you later.
--
Eih bennek, eih blavek
--
The best confidence builder is experience
But about my inspiration for writing, there's no easy answer. I've already told you, in another posting, about my love affair - that was certainly an inspiration, in a general sense: there was just so much I wanted to say. But as to how I get inspired to write a particular poem, that's a bit more tricky.
I think that most of the time, the trigger is a phrase or even a line in iambic pentameter which just floats into my head. Most of my recent work has been in sonnet form, and quite a lot of them have started in this way - particularly when I was thinking all the time of my lover. The words just turn up, and I think: "Hey, this feels sort of sonnet-ish." That's how "page 81", for example, started: the first line appeared out of nowhere, and once I'd realised what it was saying, the rest just followed.
On the other hand, "page 75" arose from my general musing on something my lover said about being unable to respond in kind to all the poems I was writing about her. I was just thinking about it, and - really, I can't find another ways of putting it - gradually the thoughts shaped themselves into a sort of sonnet-ish order. Then all I had to do was recognise what had happened, write them down, and apply a bit of technical polishing; and there it was.
I can only once recall actually sitting down at my desk, and saying: I want to write a poem about this. The result of that was "page 50." Nearly always, a seed will just appear in my head, with a little tag attached which says: "This has possibilities." But the possibilities aren't entirely in the language: they have to include the content too - making a point, or describing an emotion. If the seed doesn't include at leat a hint of content, it's just pretty words.
Pretty words get written down and consigned to a notebook, fior future consideration. So too do ideas where I get stuck part-way thorugh a sonnet, and can't see a clear way forward; and also completed sonnets which, on consideration, I think are rubbish but contain possibly useful ideas. All these have proved fruitful starting-points for new poems.
The most elusive form of inspiration is when I feel the urge just "to write something" - like an unscratchable itch inside my head. Occasionally looking at the notebook gives me an idea, but more often it's just a case of waiting until I get a feeling that there's a poem forming. That can come from anywhere; the trick, which comes with experience, is recognising it when it does appear. Then i can write it down, and scratch the itch
But always I write when I actually want to say something, something meaningful (to use a somewhat over-used word); merely burbling on is not an acceptable approach.
And having said all that, I'm not sure if it really helps. But there you are.
--
Eih bennek, eih blavek
Previous Page12345...Next Page