I am bewildered

[Blythe]

by the poems in Experimental. What the hell is going on over there?

I'm really interested in the inspiration and thought that goes into those things. Can anyone help>> koro, Britomart, christo, batesing, so on and so forth?

[Rachel Lindley]

That's why they're experimental. They're meant to bewilder.

I can't be certain about bates, but I know that in my case, I posted my experimental piece because I'm a smartass. I think the same was true with bates' piece "the degenerative wingspeed of an ipso facto blah blah . . ." However, I could be wrong in his case.

For the rest, they bewilder me as well, but I think perhaps that's at least partially the point.

Rachel

[&*(9)%46#$&]

Although this may not always be the case, one of the aims of experimental poetry is for it to be used as a tool to explore the question,
"What is poetry?"

A person confined to solitary confinement,without writing utensiles, and forbidden to speak- can still
THINK up a poem- an re-think it again and again. This means that poetry can be traced from writing/speech to thought. Does this mean that poetry starts in the mind of poet?
I'd say no. The genealogy of poem,arguably, can propably be traced back to a multitude of interactions between poet and
the world of culture,history,fact, fiction fantasy etc.

If we don't know what a poem IS- but we can agree that it can be written,spoken, or thought and we can't,with any real certainity, pinpoint the genesis of a poem,
then who's to say that a poem can't a series of 'typographical symbols'? If I can write and speak my poem;why can't I film it?
How close can I get my poem to other forms (prose, rhetoric, etc)before it becomes those forms? What and where are the limits of poetry?

I do not see convential and experimental poetry being simply opposed to each other, or one being the simulucrum of the other- rather
think that they feed of each other- and you can sometimes find elements of one in the other.

But,of course, experimental poetry can just be fun and the refuge of those who want to be
smartasses.

[Britomart]

Hello Blythe. First of all, can I ask why you don't respond or pose questions to "those things" in Experimental if they pique your curiosity? I read your response to The Broad's "Emotions on Paper". You said, "Everyday you people get weirder". Why are we weird? I frequently read comments in High Critique which state the aim of the poet should be to present interesting ideas and to use language in new and imaginative ways. This is what I am trying to do with my experimental poems, and this is what I see others doing with their experimental poems. "We" are just as "normal" as any other poets. Do you think that the poems posted in Experimental have less value than say, poems posted in High Critique? I am ecstatic that there has been an increase in the amount of posts and responses to Experimental and am glad to see you're interested enough to have created a whole topic here about it. I would be more than happy to answer your questions; however, I don't feel I can do so until I feel assured that they are not being asked in a condescending or derisive manner.

[This message has been edited by Britomart (edited 12-20-2000).]

[FireFlower]

Originally posted by &*(9)%46#$&:
Although this may not always be the case, one of the aims of experimental poetry is for it to be used as a tool to explore the question,
"What is poetry?"

A person confined to solitary confinement,without writing utensiles, and forbidden to speak- can still
THINK up a poem- an re-think it again and again. This means that poetry can be traced from writing/speech to thought. Does this mean that poetry starts in the mind of poet?
I'd say no. The genealogy of poem,arguably, can propably be traced back to a multitude of interactions between poet and
the world of culture,history,fact, fiction fantasy etc.

If we don't know what a poem IS- but we can agree that it can be written,spoken, or thought and we can't,with any real certainity, pinpoint the genesis of a poem,
then who's to say that a poem can't a series of 'typographical symbols'? If I can write and speak my poem;why can't I film it?
How close can I get my poem to other forms (prose, rhetoric, etc)before it becomes those forms? What and where are the limits of poetry?

I do not see convential and experimental poetry being simply opposed to each other, or one being the simulucrum of the other- rather
think that they feed of each other- and you can sometimes find elements of one in the other.

But,of course, experimental poetry can just be fun and the refuge of those who want to be
smartasses.



This is very interesting, thanks... Because of this thread I stopped by experimental, this response has made me want to visit more often. Thanks! http://www.everypoet.com/poetry/poetry_forums/biggrin.gif-FireFlower

[Blythe]

Hey Broad Rachel; Somehow this "smart-assery" doesn't surprise me, heh. I actually figured that about your post, hence my "You people get weirder..." response.

&*(9)%46#$& I think you have an interesting point, and perhaps one of the best ways to answer that question. It seems sometimes that the kind of poetry I read in Experimental aims to obscure understanding or communication as much as possible, and I don't know if that is part of poetry. I'm not saying that a conventional style is the correct style, but I also want there to be a point to reading a poem beyond questioning the role of an ampersand. I think the exploration part of it is wonderful, but there may be a danger of being too free and easy, being able to throw together any collection of symbols and calling it a poem. Not that any of you would ever do that, but maybe at some other forum...Seriously, though, I think your last question makes a lot of sense in context of my confusion. Thanks for replying.

Britomart, Hello. Geez, don't get yer knickers all twisted! Ha. Really, my questions are wholeheartedly curious and without contempt; in fact, I started this thread after reading (_______________) and the comments it received, wondering how/why it was composed as it was and what really went on in the minds of the readers who responded. Anyway, thanks for replying.
No offense intended.

Still curious,
Blythe

[Britomart]

Hmmm... This question is harder to answer than I thought it would be. I agree with &*(9)46#$&'s comments, especially when he says that conventional and experimental poetry aren't opposed to each other. I am still trying to communicate an idea in an experimental poem. My other goal is to try and expand the definition of what poetry is. You and The Broad stated that you thought we were trying to obscure meaning. That is never my intention. I never write experimental poetry for the sole purpose of trying to stump, frustrate, or exasperate someone. That would be going against what I believe the aim of poetry is, to communicate. I re-read the comments to my (___________) poem and noticed that I said that the only person who would understand the poem would be me. I meant the only person who would wholly understand it would be me. I feel that this is true of "normal" poetry as well. Only the poet knows what type of emotion or thought or intention went into their poem. But just like "normal" poetry, I believe most experimental poems are trying to communicate, not cloak, thoughts, ideas, and expressions. I think experimental poetry is just asking the reader to try a little harder to understand what is being communicated.

Experimental poetry is obviously a lot more open to myriad interpretations than most regular poetry. I think this is one of the best things about it. When I read poetry I find that the poems I enjoy the most are poems which are either somewhat vague or completely vague. I like to read poetry in which an obvious statement, thought, or emotion isn't being forced on me. As a reader I like to come up with my own interpretations and conclusions. An excellent example of a poem that does this is Patrice's "Harvest" poem. I gleaned multiple meanings from this poem and it invoked in me numerous images. I think poetry that accomplishes these things are written by poets who have respect for the reader. They ask the reader to participate in the experience; they ask the reader to use their imaginations. I feel this is how poetry, visual art, and even music are so closely connected. Poems are just like paintings or sculptures. Some are just more open to interpretation than others. To use only words is like an artist limiting the number of colors they can use in a painting. As an experimental poet, I am simply using every possible means of communication that is available to me. I am trying to paint an interesting picture that often involves and engages the reader's sense of vision. I want to present and convey ideas and emotions to people in new and different ways. I seek to challenge their imaginations not only in the presentation of the idea(s), but also by purposely leaving the interpretation(s) vague, so that they can take from it what they want to or need to.

You've asked about what the inspiration that goes into these things is. That I cannot answer; I do not know the answer. I do know that it is usually an intense feeling of frustration that spawns them. My (___________) poem deals with the frustration of feeling like a means of communication has collapsed, that sometimes even when people talk to each other they're not saying anything at all. It deals with the idea that sometimes people talk to each other like they're characters in a play, reading memorized lines that don't mean anything to them personally. Hence the title: "The Tragedy of (____________)". But it has other meanings too. A friend who read it told me he thought I missed the snow, which was true. So.......

Hopefully all this has helped. Like I said, I'm really glad you're interested. I hope some of the other experimental poets will wander over and add to this discussion. Thank you for your interest, and thanks to the others who gave already given their own input.

[christopoloppopus]

L.earning O.celot L.inguistics

my mom's going to work, so i hafta give up computer.
i'll edit this post when i return.

Thank You.

[weatheringdaleson]

Nobody ever tells you, "Post in General."

The question, "Why can't I film my poem?" is an excellent one. I think that is what many who post in Exp. try to do. In many ways, the forum is one big "descriptive challenge." Describe this sound, that thought process. Transcribe static. Film your dream. This ain't easy.

And it's much harder to critique. That's the toughest part of the forum. Thank the gods for koro, who has the innate talent for recognizing the worth in these offerings, and has advice for bettering them.

I'm still thinking about bates's duck...

-w.

[koro]

concrete poetry is an unconcern for lines, it treats the letter as literal and sometimes it is off the page. language poetry. if we take what has happened in the twentieth century with visual artists' who do collage and make poems with words and pictures and objects. this is one way to discribe experimental, then there are sound poems. multidirectional rhyme. dada is an inspiration, the 60's poets another.

this excerpt is from a paper i have on haiku and concrete poetics:
"the kinetic effects of language do not seem to have been exposed until this century by the poets of the concrete movement of the 1950's and 60s. quite simply as we read even from line to line in a paragraph and from page to page our eye travels from left to right, and up and down. if then words are spaced less regimentally and more imaginatively an entire range of movements can be created.
it is obvious that inherent in a language that is written and spoken there are at least three elements: sound, sight, and movement. from this alone it must follow that all three have validity and potential as techniques for the poet. also, it is only because of our oral tradition, which is just as much an oral bias, that we fail firstly even to recognize the appearance and movement of language and secondly to give them the same weight and consideration as its sound. it is also important to note that the interpretation and appreciation of visual and kinetic techniques require a new approach to language which, because of our oral bias, is grossly underdeveloped. it is primarily because of this underdevelopment that many see concrete poems as puzzles lacking the immediacy they so easly recongnize...

for the concrete purist a technique once done is over with and it is time to move on. this view however tends to ignore the fact that there are more essays on the pure concrete poem than there are such poems themselves.

...so long as we measure these poems against existing or traditional poetic values the result is always an empty dialectic. as we attempt to categorize them we miss the point. them and what they say to us. the fact that they are creating new poetic values and not always reassuring us of our old ones. they are a thing in themselves and shoud be apprecited as such..."

hope this helps you all to understand the nature of experimental poetry.

[weatheringdaleson]

I thank you for that excerpt, koro.

Here's somewhere to go for experimental, concrete, sound, and found poetry (hope this works).
http://www.ubu.com

I like bewilderment.

-w.

[koro]

Originally posted by weatheringdaleson:
I thank you for that excerpt, koro.

Here's somewhere to go for experimental, concrete, sound, and found poetry (hope this works).
http://www.ubu.com

I like bewilderment.

-w.

thank you so much for the site. merrychristmas

[tbm]

yes, Blythe. i am quite serious about experimentation in poetry. sometimes i just feel i need to express my emotions (they're oozing out of me) in wonderfully creative, ingenuitive, ingenius, brilliant, talented . . . wait a minute.

i could wipe my infamous ass on a two-by-four and call it experimental

bates

[troyL]

Yeah,yoo could wipe yr tutu witha 2X4 & callit xprmntl...& it may even be considered & have brilliant essays written about the splinters danglin' from yer patooly-hole...I suggest you read "Asphyxiating Culture" by Jean Dubbuffet pub. by 4walls8windows-his anti-intellectual argument clarifies many questions about "outsider vs. mainstream" debate.Marcel Duchamps' urinal remains empty of piss,yet its' function is solidly entrenched within art history.Ornette Colemans' "Freejazz" l.p. confounded jazz purists & garnered much scorn,yet he released the "purest" form of jazz=improvisation.The Beats cracked the egg of academia & the Concretists made a juicy omlette of it...Jackson Pollocks' drip technique gained critical acclaim,spawning many imitators which diluted the original energy of such pieces...part of Pollocks' success lay in his draftmanship & an understanding of figuration(much due to formal training by Thom. Hart Benton)-Pollocks imitators thought that since the "dripstyle" had become somewhat accepted,this assured them instant acclaim...which of course is not the case.Relating to Poetry,innovation is much harder earned-any attempt at "bounds-breaking" i find interesting at least b/cause of the authors attempt to overcome the ordinary...professionalism has no appeal to me:secrets of the unkempt mind release insight like opiate smoke.There are "squares" who'll never find pleasure or meaning in art brut or outsider activity,but this is more a reflection of the unevolved & uninterested nature of an unwilling/culturally condtioned reader/viewer than the worth of an "experimental" piece...

[troyL]

http://www.fourwallseightwindows.com ...........P.S.-Weatheringdaleson-thanx so much for the great ubu link!

[This message has been edited by troyL (edited 05-06-2001).]