Poetry should be difficult?
Wed, 2003-03-05 19:28
#1
Poetry should be difficult?
Hallo.
I'm rereading a book my dad got me cheaply from a library sale. It's called 'How Poetry Works' by Philip Davies Roberts, and I like it because, unlike a lot of books on creative writing, it doesn't come down hard on styles the writer dislikes whilst holding aloft the 'masters' as examples.
With regards to the old cutting edge debate, I couldn't really think of much to say, but this paragraph from the book seems to help with the under-represented pro-cutting edge side of the argument.
"In every age, audiences and spectators have tended to resist artistic innovation. Any half-educated person can feel at home with yesterday's art; it is difficult to be as self-assured with new art, especially as each new production seems to overturn all that went before. 'Why this obscurity?' people complain. 'Why are poets (or painters, or composers) of today so incomprehensible? Give me a good old-fashioned poem (or painting, or symphony) any day!' In fact, this conflict is the basis of all art and will never change unless, of course, we completely alter our notions of what art is and what it does."
So is mainstream art a kind of contradiction? Can we call ourselves writers if our aim is to be recognised, to 'break out', to achieve popularity? I've certainly found that all the art/writing that has inspired and influenced me is a long way from Waterstone's book of the week, established classics and the booker prize. On the other hand, it seems unfair to exclude some art on the basis that it doesn't exclude us! I think today it may be that there is such a diversity of taste almost anything can find a popular audience - it may be a case of books finding small groups friends, rather than rallying the herd or sitting undiscovered. When was the last artistic event that really shook up more than a few bitter old tories?
I find this model heartening, because it thereby follows that the modern artist has to go out and find their crowd, rather than be shoehorned into the same category as every other artist, and fight against people who should be operating in a totally different area. It suggests art is for everyone, at the same time as being exclusive - that neither popularity nor obscurity renders it irrelevant. It also means that we can put down silly dreams of being icons (and the disappointment that comes with that aim,) leave it to celebrities, and perform a self-fulfilling function in society without jealousy and with just rewards for hard work.
Eh?
Rokkitnite
According to popular account, Chinese poet Bai Juyi used to read his poems to an old peasant woman and change any lines she couldn't understand. This really tickles me for some reason.
I'm sceptical of the value of 'new innovation'. Every story or poem is new to a certain extent, and old to a certain extent. To claim a piece is somehow divorced from all before is to ignore its cultural and textual heritage; to say that it is unoriginal is to deny its unique qualities, its quality of uniqueness.
I don't always practise it in my own work - several of my pieces are pretty oblique - but I see the 'old peasant woman' style of writing as the high-water mark of artistic merit.
Paulgreco
No, Rokkit, no.
You could recite to the old peasant woman
f.uck
bollocks fart
cu.nt
and she'll probably piss herself laughing and say don't change anything
yet you could recite a duffy, armitage, larkin, heaney poem, and she'd go: eh, what? change that. don't get it.
and would you? fu.ck no. they have all produced works of genius.
it's a problem we all have. i get karen to read my stuff before i perform it...because i feel i need the "lay" opinion...but all the greatest people in history stuck to their guns...waited for everyone else to get the joke. it happened with me. it's happened with you rokkit.
as soon as you start worrying about what other people want, you fade and die.
and yet
we've all done it
i am the biggest hypocrite
Hen
The story's called 'Zendo Bendo'
Hen
One guy reading to an old peasant woman is good, but if it became a rule of high art, it'd lead nowhere. However, that doesn't stop it being Rokkit's personal high rule. I juggle them myself, trying to find ones that are simple and demanding.
Writing for other people or not also depends on my mood. I guess I'd say that I don't want to compromise my personal vision, but I welcome ideas for methods, and other people's ideas will slightly alter that vision. It's always interesting to see how people respond, but I'm never sure of what constitutes a good response. In poetry especially, I don't know whether I should be confounding people or entertaining them. Entertainment is more immediate, but I sometimes think poetry as entertainment is pointless - film and other formats handle that so much better. Seems poetry has to thrive within its tradition of obscurity - what's the point in compromising for the sake of people who can get their entertainment elsewhere?
Matt
What if the old peasant woman had terrible taste in poetry, or did not actually like poetry (preferring Jackie Collins novels to be read aloud to her)?
There would maybe first have to be a vetting procedure of all the old peasant women in the village before a suitable one could be chosen for this important job.
Matt
Actually, I'm with Paul on this one. If you read the old peasant woman The Tempest from start to finish she may not understand it all (or any of it) but it's still a sublime play.
markbrown
Two quick points:
1) There is a dialectical relationship between any work of art and the art that existed before it. This means that it can often be difficult to distinguish whether something is actually 'new' or innovative or whether it just appears to be in the current climate. An example of this is the fact that 'kitchen sick' realism was actually a response to the modernism of the 1920s and 1930. (Modernism in the UK being both concerned with radical language and structure but also socially conservative and based in a small literary world.)
2) Art does not progress in a linear fashion, it tends to move in waves of action/reaction, rather like a see-saw. This means that who is the artistic conservative and who is the artistic radical very much depends on where you begin to measure from.
Rokkitnite
Not it's *not*! Hen, you are a teasing swine.
chooselife
Ah... the 'Old Grey Washer-Woman Test'.
Who's ABC's equivalent of 'Whistling Bob Harris' ?
chooselife
ha ha ha.... that should have been 'Whispering Bob Harris' of course.
Liana
never mind choose... im sure even bob whistles when hes in a good mood... and that programme wouldve been miles better if it was called the old grey whisper test...
chooselife
given that he must be pretty ancient by now, he's probably know as 'Wheezing Bob'.
jonsmalldon
He's still chugging away on Radio 2. Bob Harris Country on Thursdays and his own programme at midnight on Saturday.
I am shocked and ashamed that I know the Radio 2 schedules so closely.
Faithless
i read that book hen, for some reason there are lots of copies of it in secondhand bookshops..
i thoroughly recommend the james fenton book that was serialised in the grauniad review....it's essentially a series of essays on poetry and it's raison d'etre, all delivered in the form of tutorials on a whole range of poetic disciplines...it's the bee's bollocks, being rare and furry and a delight...
and it changed my perspective on what i do...completely.
the peasant woman of course, would tell her friends..." i just nod and occasionally ask a question..well he DOES bring mr kipling lemon drizzle slices when he comes round "...
vartis
I like James Fenton too. I've just spent ages trawling through google to try and find a copy of his essay 'The Fall of Saigon'.
I wanted to link it for folks here to read. This is fabulous, fantastic narrative writing. I couldn't recommend it highly enough. If anyone does have a link to it (it was published in Granta originally) then please stick the link up.
It may be that there are people who read this forum who have never been in trouble with the police or who have rarely, if ever, balked at authority. One of these people should get a copy of this essay from an authorised source, type it out, and then post it on the internet with a link. This infringement of copyright may upset some corporate interests. But it will not upset James Fenton and it will do a tremendous amount of good for their sense of worth. You owe this to yourself and to pretend otherwise is vanity and foolishness.
Henstoat, you might like this. When OUP made a decision to end their contemporary poetry line Fenton said:
'If a conglomerate publisher decides that every book on its list must be conceived as bearing an equal load of the expenses of the firm, then what once looked like a modestly profitable little number suddenly turns into a disgraceful little slacker. If my slim volume must do its part in sending a hundred boozy publishers to Frankfurt, or commissioning a coffin-shaped table for the boardroom, then I am at a serious disadvantage.'
Mykle
Vartis: here is, at least, a part of the essay you were refering to -
Andrea
The Fall of Saigon
Andrea
Oooh, bugger, you beat me to it, Mykle!
Mykle
Links, you spend ages looking for one - then they turn up in pairs ;o) Quite a coincidence, Andrea!
andrew o'donnell
Is the old woman hip and withit or mad and eccentric?
How about reading yr poems to a baby ..if the baby smiles or nods thoughtfully, scratches its goatee etc you would know you were on to something.
Don't just take my word for it tho.. read 'The cat sat on the mat' to a baby and I'm sure you'll find most of them are quite disapproving.
skydolphin
Poetry should be difficult?
Yes it should. If you understand a poem at first glance two things are possible:a you've missed the point, read again, b after you read carefully and still is easy, it's probably not a good poem
whether we like it or not a poem must be full of hidden meanings and different perspectives, what may look like an easy poem could be a very deep one, sometimes nevertheless difficult poems have a simple meaning, but they are better than the easy ones that have nothing to say at all.
the greatest artistry is to write a simple poem that has a very difficult and deeply meaningful purpose
so in my opinion poetry must not be purposeless difficult or not ...
Rokkitnite
What if you read a piece of verse and it instantly lifts you? Have you 'missed the point'? Is it 'not a good poem'? Instant reactions and instant understanding are what great poetry is all about. That gut reaction - everyone's read a poem that sends shivers down their spine or provokes a twinge in their chest. Difficulty and deeper meaning are all very fine, but what's wrong with a little instant feeling?
Vartis
Thanks for the links.
I don't think it's about missing the point Rokkitnite it's about depth, about returning. There is nothing wrong, of course, with instant feeling but subtlety takes longer to percolate. Subtlety is more a reflection of the universe.
Coal is black - an obvious statement.
Coal is not black, a zen saying. Which is more accurate? Which is a better reflection of reality?
It's obvious on reflection that the latter is more accurate.
Thirty spokes together make a wheel for a cart.
It is the empty space in the center
which enables it to be used.
Mold clay into a vessel;
it is the emptiness within
that creates the usefulness of the vessel.
Cut out the doors and windows in a house;
it is the empty space inside
that creates the usefulness of the house.
Thus what we have may be something substantial,
But its usefulness lies in the unoccupied, empty space.
The substance of your body is enlivened
by maintaining the part of you that is unoccupied.
From the Dao Teh Ching Hua-Ching Ni transaltion
Good Medicine. V.
skydolphin
"What if you read a piece of verse and it instantly lifts you? Have you 'missed the point'? Is it 'not a good poem'? Instant reactions and instant understanding are what great poetry is all about. That gut reaction - everyone's read a poem that sends shivers down their spine or provokes a twinge in their chest. Difficulty and deeper meaning are all very fine, but what's wrong with a little instant feeling?"
I said "If you understand a poem at first glance" not how a poem makes you feel dear Rokkitnite! there is no simplicity in how we react to certain poems as well!! another proof that the poem is a very deep one able to strike a very intimate chord of the reader's heart and soul!
I also believe that feelings make us think, the instantaneity of insticts is an extremely important reaction.
Rokkitnite
'It's obvious on reflection that the latter is more accurate.'
Hmm... no. On reflection, we see that neither is an adequate reflection of the world of emptiness. But I think I see what you're getting at. 'The tall pines are tall, the short pines are short' is another popular Zen saying. Ostensibly obvious, but with subtler interpretations.
However, you are talking about the intellectual deconstruction of a piece. Koans are not intended to be returned to and taken apart piece by piece like a puzzle box. They're more like a joke; you either get it or you don't. Having someone 'explain' it to you intellectually is the difference between seeing lightning out of one's window, and being struck by lightning. Subtlety is valuable, but I think your citing of Zen as proof of this runs somewhat contrary to your point, in so much as Zen is all about the direct, immediate experience of reality. When Joshu replied 'Mu', the monk instantly realised his enlightenment. He didn't go away and write a thesis on what his roshi might have meant.
Incidentally, thanks for the poem, Vartis. I really like it.
jonsmalldon
Bad poems are bad, good poems are good.
Bad poems can be difficult, as can good ones.
Bad poems can be simple, as can good ones.
I have no idea what rules determine which poems are good and which poems are bad.
But, for me, a good poem should make me stop and think and, usually, to do that, it has to be direct on some level.
Hen
I'm not sure about this instant feeling thing - I don't know what you mean, but I'll take it as hitting the spot, electricity going off in the brain thing. From the point of view of reader and collector, it's fine - an uplift is an uplift. From the point of view of a writer, it just leaves everything in the air - there's such a mass of reasons why a sequence of words should strike someone as right. Leaving poetry to these forces of chance seems to undermine any purpose - we get the same kind of lifts from the flash of an image, or a misheard sentence, from deja vu, from all around us.
So I would suggest poetry has to operate on a more conscious level - not necessarily a strata of meaning - but something that permits the writer control over an audience reaction.
I disagree with Rokkit about this Zen/joke comparison as well. If it is meant to be about instant realisation, then 'the tall pines are tall...etc' has overstepped the mark. It might operate that way for some people, but for me, a deceptively simple remark like that - and the coal one - works well when mulled over. A joke wears off, but this kind of quiet wisdom seems to retain its power throughout the mulling process. And I think poetry works well when mulled over as well - I prefer it to retain a level of comforting mystery, rather than end up as a code for some didacticism, but most of the lines I choose when I'm writing poems are chosen because they mean more than they say in the instant of understanding.
Up mulling.
Rokkitnite
'A joke wears off, but this kind of quiet wisdom seems to retain its power throughout the mulling process.'
Aha. This may be why a lot of poetry repulses me. The frozen moment is a bit moribund to me. So many poems are like 'this is the minutiae, and this is why it was important', and that seems to kill any sense of wonder stone-dead. I'm very big on reading qua experience as opposed to the reading of experiences.
But it's different strokes for different folks, I guess. Sometimes I like the subtle style, sometimes the direct style. It depends whether I'm in a Soto or Rinzai frame of mind.
Vartis
Rokkitnite. Points taken.
It dosen't have to be you get it or you don't. It can be looked at again, discussed, mulled over. Gradual is okay [you seem to know this because you mention Soto and Rinzai, but it confused me because then you would know that Rinzai is only one approach and therefore 'gradual' is not left out. It's not either a lightning strike or nothing. A glow is okay to work by...]
Anyway, as a personal preference and an example of something which left an immediate impression when I read it, I give you Seamus Heaney's North.
NORTH
I returned to a long strand,
the hammered curve of a bay,
and found only the secular
powers of the Atlantic thundering.
I faced the unmagical
invitations of Iceland,
the pathetic colonies
of Greenland, and suddenly
those fabulous raiders,
those lying in Orkney and Dublin
measured against
their long swords rusting,
those in the soled
belly of stone ships,
those hacked and glinting
in the gravel of thawed streams
were ocean-deafened voices
warning me, lifted again
in violence and epiphany.
The longship's swimming tongue
was buoyant with hindsight--
it said Thor's hammer swung
to geography and trade,
thick-witted couplings and revenges,
the hatreds and behindbacks
of the althing, lies and women,
exhaustions nominated peace,
memory incubating the spilled blood.
It said, 'Lie down
in the word-hoard, burrow
the coil and gleam
of your furrowed brain.
Compose in darkness.
Expect aurora borealis
in the long foray
but no cascade of light.
Keep your eye clear
as the bleb of the icicle,
trust the feel of what nubbed treasure
your hands have known.'
Vartis
I thought about the 'coal is black' and looked up the original place I read it some years ago. This is the author's context rather than my adopted one:
This school [Zen] is unique in various ways in the history of religion. Its doctrines, theoretically stated, may be said to be those of speculative mysticism, but they are presented and demonstrated in such a manner that only those initiates who, after long training, have actually gained an insight into the system can understand their ultimate signification. To those who have not acquired this penetrating knowledge, that is, to those who have not experienced Zen in their everyday active life – its teachings, or rather its utterances, assume quite a peculiar, uncouth, and even enigmatical aspect. Such people, looking at Zen more or less conceptually, consider Zen utterly absurd and ludicrous, or deliberately making itself unintelligible in order to guard its apparent profundity against outside criticism. But, according to the followers of Zen, its apparently paradoxical statements are not artificialities contrived to hide themselves behind a screen of obscurity; but simply because the human tongue is not an adequate organ for expressing the deepest truths of Zen, the latter cannot be made the subject of logical exposition; they are to be experienced in the inmost soul when they become for the first time intelligible. In point of fact, no plainer and more straightforward expressions than those of Zen have ever been made by any other branch of human experience. ‘Coal is black’ – this is plain enough; but Zen protests, ‘Coal is not black’. This is also plain enough, and indeed even plainer than the first positive statement when we come right down to the truth of the matter.
D.T.Suzuki ‘An introduction to Zen Buddhism’ Edited by Christmas Humphreys
vartis
Of all the statements about art over the last few years the one that sticks in my mind is the guy who put all his possessions through a crusher. Every single thing he possessed was crushed to powder. Letters, records, books, gifts, paintings, family photographs, his passport. Everything he owned. His possessions, numbering over 7,000, were catalogued, put in to trays and then went through the crusher. It was done in an old C & A shop where anyone could go in and look at his things and watch them be destroyed.
I’m not sure why it sticks with me so. Maybe it’s because it’s difficult to say anything about our relationship to possessions which makes us think or has anything new to add. Probably it stuck though because I admired the way the work demanded more than a ready wrapped response. A fair response to it, I think, would be something which was not so superficial that it too was only fit for the crusher.
Michael Landy was the guy’s name.
Rokkitnite
Yeah... it's very strange you should quote that particular passage, Vartis. It actually inspired me to write a short story, which I'm in the process of redrafting ready for posting. This part was especially important to me:
'To those who have not acquired this penetrating knowledge, that is, to those who have not experienced Zen in their everyday active life – its teachings, or rather its utterances, assume quite a peculiar, uncouth, and even enigmatical aspect. Such people, looking at Zen more or less conceptually, consider Zen utterly absurd and ludicrous, or deliberately making itself unintelligible in order to guard its apparent profundity against outside criticism.'
The story's about an old roshi in a Zendo in England who has been bluffing his way through sesshin for years. A freelance reporter sneaks undercover into the Zendo to write an article on it. Perhaps the theme is better explained by this quote of Shunryu Suzuki's:
'We shouldn't be disappointed with a bad teacher or a bad student. You know, if a bad student and a bad teacher strive for the truth, something real will be established. That is our zazen.'