Lit.Org - a community for readers and writers Advanced Search

Average Rating

(0 votes)

You must login to vote

I don't know if this belongs in opinions, blogs or what (what is a blog anyways?). So I'll put it under opinions.

I am not a college graduate, I am a published poet all be it a small quarterly but published none the less. What does this qualify me to do? It qualifies me to say that complete understanding of the inner works of a piece of literature is not necessary in order for it to be enjoyed, even cherished. Whether or not a writer has followed the rules and laws of "correct" poetry is often irrelevant to the poetic and artistic achievement he or she creates. O.K. so some of us don't have diction down to a tee, so what... I've seen some poems written by children that devastate! I know I have achieved my goal when a poem of mine brings one tear of joy, love, compassion, whatever, to my reader. Or a laugh for Pete’s sake. I am aiming for emotion and reflection. Perhaps others are aiming for something else I don't know. My opinion is that to analyze a poem down to its Pico level destroys its life. If you are presented with a magnificent pocket watch. Its beautiful craftsmanship is breathtaking... (To you), you know there are working cogs and wheels and levers and springs and sprockets within. Do you open it up to see? Perhaps the manufacturer left flaws on a particular fly-wheel... is it so important that you must destroy or at least dismantle this piece of art to see this flaw? The working of the pocket watch doesn't seem to be affected, well neither do the emotions I experience from reading some poetry nor the emotions I engender in my readers. My point is that for some it may be a delight to dissect literature, but for me? I'd rather experience the mystery, the magic and the emotional journey of poetry as an art.

"See the man with the lonely eyes, oh, take his hand, you'll be surprised." Supertramp.


The following comments are for "Poetry as art"
by nauticus66

this reminded me of a book i read some time ago, back in the days when i wasn't such an 'unenlightened ass.'

it was a book by richard dawkins called, 'unweaving the rainbow' and it basically expressed the same idea at the outset, but reached a different conclusion.

many people perceive the body of science to be cold and rigid, without life. for example, by looking at a rainbow from a scientific perspective as light passing through drops of water at different distances from the perceiver rather than as some fanciful arc of light pointing the way to gold, some feel that the rainbow loses a bit of it's magic, it's mystery.

the conclusion of the book is that a greater understanding of science in general allows us a greater capacity to love and remain in awe of natural phenomena because we understand and can appreciate it. the same is true of literature.

( Posted by: die_daily [Member] On: July 10, 2004 )

Art As Device
One can forever seek to construct, deconstruct, and-or to further codify literary expression. Give me, however, that brief moment of poetry's defamiliarization; show me none of your studied devices, but rather, show me your heart.

There, will I best apprehend your vision and then will we both come to share what is most to be gained in it. Technicians, I fear, make dull poets.

Michael, an opinion, in Seattle.

( Posted by: Michael Stucky [Member] On: July 10, 2004 )

art stinks
art stinks because they dissect it and pay too much attention to it. i hate art. i love life.
uh...what's the difference?

( Posted by: jesuschriss [Member] On: July 10, 2004 )

poetry as art

I enjoy poetry when I am reading and feeling the ideas and the emotions that the author put there. I am more likely to comment on these than on structure and form.

I totally agree with you, when you have read a good piece of work your only thoughts should be about the content, and I love comments on content!

The only time I comment on structure is when I feel it has spoiled the authors message and the message is worthy of being presented in a meaningful fashion, I too hate the complete disection of a piece unless, as Romay pointed out, it is requested. I personally want this on my work in order to improve, but I still prefer to get my message across.

Your work is meaninful, and as I have already commented on a particular poem of yours, meets the criteria you seek:

"I know I have achieved my goal when a poem of mine brings one tear of joy, love, compassion, whatever, to my reader."

Thank you for you opinion or 'whatever', I think you have spelt out clearly the true meaning of poetry.


( Posted by: ivordavies [Member] On: July 10, 2004 )

I have always felt that poetry should be straight from the heart, nothing held back, which at times is hard to do. I sometimes feel like this is a front because I have no formal training in literature and know very little about the different types of poetry. But deep down inside I know a poem can be very simple and to the point, not many fancy words or rhyme, but can touch the heart deeper than almost anything. I love to feel poetry. The writers here at that I have come to love have the gift of expression. You are one of them. I thank you for sharing with all of us. You have definately succeeded at your art.


( Posted by: nae411 [Member] On: July 10, 2004 )

poetry as art

( Posted by: nimashirali [Member] On: July 10, 2004 )

poetry as art
Thank you all for taking the time to read my opinion and thank you for your comments. I must stress that it is only my opinion and that I in no way wish to disrespect those who wish to look deeper into the inner workings of literature. What I ment by art is that poetry is subjective in that the writer may have ment it one way but each reader will see it their own way and that many of us come away with emotions about the piece rather than a technical list of what was correct or incorrect about it.

( Posted by: nauticus66 [Member] On: July 11, 2004 )

Fallacies both Affective and Intentional
This is well traveled ground. It even has a name or two or more. Among these names are:

Affective Fallacy wherein the reader relates what is felt about a piece while meaning to relate what the piece technically is.

Another name that applies is Intentional Fallacy wherein the reader seeks to examine too closely the intentions of the author and misses the truth or message of the poem altogether.

Poetry to many, is neither fully message driven nor is it purely technique in execution. It is a melding of these two and of whatever-more the author is able to combine together as expression, each poem whole and distinct unto itself.

This is at least what my reading tells me.

Michael, somewhere, in Seattle.

( Posted by: Michael Stucky [Member] On: July 12, 2004 )

Add Your Comment

You Must be a member to post comments and ratings. If you are NOT already a member, signup now it only takes a few seconds!

All Fields are required

Commenting Guidelines:
  • All comments must be about the writing. Non-related comments will be deleted.
  • Flaming, derogatory or messages attacking other members well be deleted.
  • Adult/Sexual comments or messages will be deleted.
  • All subjects MUST be PG. No cursing in subjects.
  • All comments must follow the sites posting guidelines.
The purpose of commenting on Lit.Org is to help writers improve their writing. Please post constructive feedback to help the author improve their work.