Page Summary
andalus.livejournal.com - (no subject)
andalus.livejournal.com - (no subject)
localcharacter.livejournal.com - (no subject)
grashupfer.livejournal.com - (no subject)
erotetica.livejournal.com - (no subject)
proximoception.livejournal.com - (no subject)
proximoception.livejournal.com - (no subject)
proximoception.livejournal.com - (no subject)
erotetica.livejournal.com - (no subject)
andalus.livejournal.com - (no subject)
andalus.livejournal.com - (no subject)
proximoception.livejournal.com - (no subject)
grashupfer.livejournal.com - (no subject)
parishat.livejournal.com - (no subject)
proximoception.livejournal.com - (no subject)
whatever-being.livejournal.com - (no subject)- (Anonymous) - (no subject)
parishat.livejournal.com - (no subject)
proximoception.livejournal.com - (no subject)
proximoception.livejournal.com - (no subject)
parishat.livejournal.com - (no subject)
Style Credit
- Style: Neutral Good for Practicality by
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2009-03-14 03:52 am (UTC)I want someone to explain to me the ethos of this school of thought, I'm sure I'm missing something.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-14 10:32 am (UTC)do you not like certain things which actually are poetry?
no subject
Date: 2009-03-14 12:37 pm (UTC)But I've enjoyed Fernando Pessoa, especially under his own name and as Álvaro de Campos. And I've enjoyed them precisely because I can read them without a huge critical apparatus. (My critical apparatus is only average in size, and my therapist told me not to worry so much about it anyway.)
no subject
Date: 2009-03-14 01:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-14 04:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-14 07:23 pm (UTC)Though some things...I think everyone owes it to themself, sans apparatus, to read - some of these people. But my list of necessaries is doubtless overpersonal.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-14 07:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-14 07:33 pm (UTC)Almost everything large numbers of people bother to praise is good for something - and something you can recognize. But not all of those somethings are necessary, and many are pretty blithely outclassed by works of other poets packed tight with everythings.
That said, Pound sucks.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-14 08:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-15 01:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 03:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 07:54 am (UTC)I don't think I agree, actually. Originality is very much unitary. But writers aren't just original, they're specialists in creating what will capture, hold, develop, highlight and communicate originalities. Not "here's an idea" but the activation and ramification and exhaustion of an idea to its fullest degree and furthest limits. Which is why it's kind of frightening.
Originalities are all over. Little things that are new or clever or work interestingly - even your octopus thing must be full of discussable ones. But no one reads for those, except in genre fiction (which is why genre fiction has a bad name, since it relies on small variations). Even there no one is a fan because of the variations - they want to be captured by sensual pirates or shoot space lasers or cast magic missiles at cowboys. The variations are what you talk about afterwards, the equivalent of a cigarette; or, more likely, they're what you think about when you want to break into the field, since all the work is cut out for you in a given genre except whatever gimmick will send eyes your way rather than to the other 42,000 aspirants.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-17 01:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-17 01:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-18 08:07 am (UTC)I mostly run into trouble with poems where intelligibility itself seems to be a non-issue - the poet isn't trying for it, or can't achieve it because of mental static on their end. So I blame a human there too, for sharing if not for writing.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-19 05:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-20 07:26 pm (UTC)ot--Lunch with Sircy in a few.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-20 07:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-21 07:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-21 07:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-21 02:22 pm (UTC)