Poetics and Poetry Discussion

Post a message
  • Jefferson Carter (4/27/2014 5:08:00 PM) Post reply | Read 2 replies

    OK, OK, almost done. I just realized the major obstacle to surmount when discussing poetics with Lamont; when he talks about meter or pattern; he doesn't know WTF he's yammering about. Here he is talking about his " free verse" : " I write verse that has a strong metered tone. However yes, I still believe that metrical poetry, or poetry that approximates it (like my own) is some of the best poetry. Pattern will always sound better than formless, chatty remarks pretending to be poetry."

    There is no such thing as a " strong, metered tone." A poem is either metered or it's not. Scanning free verse makes no sense, since there's no base meter underlying a free verse poem, but I suppose any single line of any poem has a pattern of sorts, even my anti-rhythmic work:

    some editor wanted to delete this
    / / u / / u / u / u

    The isolated line above could be described as having five feet, the first a spondee, the next an iamb, and the last three trochees; is this a strong rhythm? I don't know. It sounds as " musical" to me as any trochaic line Lamont has stumbled onto. Here's the question: Lamont, how do you go about creating lines that have a pattern, that are musically strong? I think you're mostly thrashing around in the dark, as far as poetics go.

    Replies for this message:
    • Lamont Palmer (4/27/2014 7:59:00 PM) Post reply | Read 1 reply

      My work speaks for itself, JC, as you discovered long ago. You haven't just begun reading me. Are you senile, or just playing dumb?-LP 7/23/2005 2: 47: 00 PM FORUM: Poetics & Poetry Discussion ... more

    • Mike Acker (4/27/2014 5:31:00 PM) Post reply

      I think we have a classical checkmate. What Palmer is trying to do now is say: " What is defeat to some is victory for others! " . Unbelievable. Instead of having the maturity to accept t ... more

  • Jefferson Carter (4/27/2014 2:35:00 PM) Post reply | Read 3 replies

    FINAL WORDS in the " Battle" between Lamont and JC?

    " Yes, JC, every metaphor is 'goofy' in your sight, when it veers from 'plainspeak'. I've literally seen you go through lines in Merrill and Crane and Geoffrey Hill, hurling the same dumb 'charge' at them as you're hurling at me. Which, frankly, makes me quite proud. If you're stupid enough to TRY to assail those two greats, then of course, I don't stand a chance. You remind me of someone who typically hates poetry because poets never just 'say what they mean'. Thats your prosaic brain leading you. Anyway, I knew this would devolve into, as you call it, 'a pissing contest'...."

    Lamont, listen, puhleeze! I don't really care to trash your poems (trash-able as many of them are) . I wanted to uncover the basis of your bias against plain style (which, the more I think about it, has to do with diction and little else) and to understand your conceptions of rhythm, form, and meter. If you re-read, carefully, my comments, you'll see I love good formal poetry (Shakespeare's Sonnet 130 is one of my favorite poems): you'll also notice my love for figures of speech WHEN they work. Whether they're written in plain diction or elevated diction, they fail if they're not both SURPRISING (not cliched) AND APPROPRIATE (the more you think of the two halves of a simile, for instance, the more unexpected similarities arise.)

    Two examples of failed figures of speech:

    Hart Crane, a line from the bridge: “the eyes, like seagulls stung with rime—.“ The simile IS surprising; who would ever compare eyes to salt-stung seagulls? It’s also inappropriate; the more you consider possible similarities between eyes and salted seagulls, the fewer you find.

    Here’s a student’s laughable attempt at, in Lamont’s words, “linguistic boldness, ” a complex mish-mash of metaphors the boy wrote as a Valentine Day poem and pinned to his sweetie’s pillow:

    “Each day at dawn,
    I drive the cattle of my soul
    to the mudholes of your eyes.”

    Need I say more?

    Replies for this message:
    • Dan Reynolds (4/27/2014 6:15:00 PM) Post reply

      Cattle? How common. He could at least have used Wildebeest...; ¬)

    • Lamont Palmer (4/27/2014 5:15:00 PM) Post reply

      Amish Girls Where is the religious eye?Morning is dark. In Pennsylvania, a tear has left youngish ducts, and blood has replaced it. A schoolhouse was cold. In the wind comes more cold, ... more

    • Lamont Palmer (4/27/2014 4:39:00 PM) Post reply

      Gee, I guess that goes to show that, what you 'think' is a failed figure of speech, apparently, someone else, a very long time ago, when poetry was poetry, thought it was pretty effective. There are ... more

  • Gulsher John (4/27/2014 12:49:00 PM) Post reply | Read 3 replies

    In early cultures CREATIVITY termed as inspiration, magic, an evil spirit and imitation etc.
    for example Greek philosophers like Plato rejected the concept of creativity(in poesy) preferring to see ART as a form of discovery.
    Asked in The Republic, " Will we say, of a painter, that he makes something?" , Plato answers, " Certainly not, he merely imitates.(wikipedia)
    lets see how fellow PHers respond to it...

    p.s. i put this question to JC as well.

    Replies for this message:
    • Jefferson Carter (4/27/2014 1:44:00 PM) Post reply | Read 1 reply

      John, discussions about creativity don't interest me. Discussions about the craft of a specific poet or poem do. Philosophy doesn't interest me. Playing with words, sounds, and images does.

    • Mike Acker (4/27/2014 1:01:00 PM) Post reply

      I think Plato is right. To " make" is to create a new space-time. We re-arrange, we copy, we interfere in a way that things that are naturally occurring, behave a little differently. Our ... more

    To read all of 3 replies click here
  • Mike Acker (4/27/2014 12:01:00 PM) Post reply | Read 2 replies

    Back to civility... Shelter(revised) as reply

    Replies for this message:
    • Mike Acker (4/27/2014 12:02:00 PM) Post reply | Read 2 replies

      Battered souls, chopped up lives, fried brains, sliced minds, mixed with the biting vinegar of foul abuse, the type that strikes fear, and grows demons, larger than life. Clipped wings, then ... more

    To read all of 2 replies click here
  • Jefferson Carter (4/27/2014 10:36:00 AM) Post reply | Read 3 replies

    PHers, the debate between me and Lamont began with my asking him to elucidate his poetics and their origin. I said, " I'm NOT talking about our various poetic attempts at fulfilling, in our own writing, our preferences in style. I'm talking about knowing something about POETICS, something more complicated and profound than half-learned slogans from an undergrad lit class (for instance, Lamont's cramped view that if a rhythm isn't iambic, it's not musical.) Lamont, you stiff dork, respond to the issue, not to that worn-out tape in your head! Jayzus, what a drag you can be! " So, I'll reiterate: I LOVE well-done formal poetry. I find it awfully difficult to do well myself but awfully easy to do badly. I was hoping Lamont's and my exchange would encourage our PH poet-wannabes to accept how crucial are craft and knowledge ABOUT one's chosen art form.

    Replies for this message:
    • Mike Acker (4/27/2014 11:56:00 PM) Post reply

      You need to zip it now, Palmer. I think you're done. You have no credibility. Forty four years of writing or trying to along with what 10 years on here. Time to move on, a$$ h*le.

    • Mike Acker (4/27/2014 12:28:00 PM) Post reply | Read 1 reply

      I am sure JC will answer himself, but I think you misunderstood part of the exchange. Palmer constantly brings up the notion that formal, metered poetry is the only way to produce aesthetic poetry. ... more

    • Gulsher John (4/27/2014 12:15:00 PM) Post reply

      JC what you have said, it's all or nearly gospel, but if a poet follows the so called established 'NORMs and conventions' (or even of others') then where the hell " Creativity" is? does a p ... more

  • Herbert Guitang (4/27/2014 1:00:00 AM) Post reply

    Free style or strict and rhymed poem?

  • Alexander Rizzo (4/27/2014 12:30:00 AM) Post reply | Read 1 reply

    can we now move on to other things?these arguments are interesting but in the end its just going down a rabbit hole, mr carter and mr palmer are both published. in fact i've seen where they are both published at least once in the same journal, so its safe to say somebody approves of their work, theres no poem written that someone, somewhere, doesn't think stinks, this has been said before, often the finer the poem the less fans it'll have, great poetry isn't easy poetry in most cases, but to go round and round on whose theories are better, who's right or wrong is pointless, i dont like when palmer says carter doesn't write poetry because its all poetry; this bickering is just unimpressive noise

    Replies for this message:
    • Mike Acker (4/27/2014 12:12:00 PM) Post reply

      You must be a flat out moron. Palmer has consistently claimed that someone's or another's poetry lacked meter and music. He would repeat meter over and over. Now. it is clear that he never knew wha ... more

  • Gulsher John (4/26/2014 11:55:00 PM) Post reply | Read 1 reply

    what would happen if we treat IMAGE and IMAGERY otherwise, (or likewise)
    in the context of Free and Formal prosody.

    p.s Refreshing our memories and enjoying LP and JC's volleys.

    Replies for this message:
  • Lamont Palmer (4/26/2014 11:45:00 PM) Post reply

    By all means, 'Mike', listen to JC. But only when he's NOT angry and not engaged in a fight. -LP

    Jefferson Carter (10/14/2013 10: 04: 00 PM) Post reply | Read 1 reply
    Lamont, pretty nice poem, especially the tender and true portrayal of that naked back. I think, for the most part, you allowed the subject to generate your music without forcing your pre-conceived ideas of music on the subject. " Barber" is enough of a title, eh?Good one. Is that Sherrie complimenting the poem?Holy shit! Talk about a blast from the past!

  • Mike Acker (4/26/2014 10:27:00 PM) Post reply | Read 2 replies

    J.C. has has just exposed you for the fraud you are and all you have to say is: " everyone shills for his own style and theories" . It is not about theory here. You always argue for formal AND metered poetry. Well it is clear, in the most embarrassing way I must say, that you know nothing about meter. Forget all the other crap that goes on her. The bottom line is that your poetry is crap. Period end of subject. If that were not enough, you have been exposed as a big mouthed fraud. That is OK, you have enough female dogs on here, like ahemm and the " little" snake, Peter Stavros! ?, to keep you looking good, only in in your own mind, of course. Then you have the real female dogs like Sherrie to keep you company in the middle of the tree.

    ITS ABOUT THE POETRY, WHAT YOU CAN WRITE AND WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN. The rest is hot air, what you are full of, Palmer.

    If J.C.'s poetry had been cr@p, I would have told him so. Finally there are two in the crowd who see nothing but a pathetic, naked moron who has tried to intimidate evryone on here into seeing his fine clothing. As JC has proven, THE EMPEROR(more like moron to have ever thought he could fool everyone) HAS NO CLOTHING!

    Replies for this message:
    • Mike Acker (4/26/2014 11:41:00 PM) Post reply

      Close that big mouth and go study about meter. JC exposed you fair and square. I should really write a poem about people like you, yeah, I'll call it The Mediocrities no wait maybe Lamont Palmer and ... more

    • Lamont Palmer (4/26/2014 11:25:00 PM) Post reply

      Even JC doesn't believe that, 'Mike'. So who are you trying to convince, me or yourself?This is what your mentor thinks when he's being honest and doesn't feel threatened. Are you disappointed in him ... more

[Hata Bildir]