re: In Your Own Words, How Do You Define Poetry? page 3

to think

i am therefore i think i know

i know therefore i think i am

i am therefore i know i think

i think i am therefore i know

i know i am therefore i think

i think therfore i know i am

robert

g'day sweet desert

it is difficult to waffle with less than ten words

The inner expression of once's soul and deepest feelings...

hay aristocles,

i think that you are wrong because poetry is a way to scrachdown your feelings and the meaning of every part lays beneath the surface of the poem and so if you read eachpart a few times you would get to the meaning. try it i hope it works for you as it does for me.

How do you define poetry?

It's interesting that people make statements about "poetry" as a whole: poetry is this, poetry is that, poetry does this, poetry does that.

Whereas if we look at "poetry" as a whole, we find that the word is used for so many different things, that it's impossible to make a sensible statement that applies to all of them.

Moreover, some readers are more interested in the sentiments a poem expresses, some in the way those sentiments are expressed, and others in the conjunction of the two. Or you may like a poem because you liked it when you were young; or because it reminds you of something in your own life.

Then too, many (or rather, most) poems, even by famous poets, are at best mostly poor or mediocre.

MrP

Sylvia Plath has once said:

"I'm talking about the smallish, unofficial garden-variety peom. How shall I describe it?--a door opens, a door shuts. In between you have had a glimpse: a garden, a person, a rainstorm, a dragonfly, a heart, a city."

"The poet becomes an expert packer of suitcases."

Then too, many (or rather, most) poems, even by famous poets, are at best mostly poor or mediocre.

One poet jumps to mind.

Seriously, I think the problem with many contemporary poets, at least in modern urban societies, is that the middle-class lifestyle has often sheltered writers from experiencing life on a wider scale, so the outcome of these poetic efforts often seem like what we Chinese call "fung fa sut yuet". (I hope I don't offend anyone with my comment.)

But then, I don't know anything about poetry...so feel free to ignore my comments...

Julielai
Seriously, I think the problem with many contemporary poets, at least in modern urban societies, is that the middle-class lifestyle has often sheltered writers from experiencing life on a wider scale...

Yes...19th century poetry smells of the drawing room, and 20th century poetry smells of the seminar.

You have to go back to the 18th century if you want a little fresh air.

MrP

Hi Mr. P.,

Would you say a lot of the early poems smell of the church? (I'm not familiar with Eng. literature at all...)

Not necessarily; on the one hand you have churchmen such as Lydgate, Herbert, and Herrick; but on the other, you have those who had some kind of role in public life, such as Chaucer, Spenser and Marvell; and others who were soldiers at some point (Jonson, Sidney, Suckling). In fact it probably isn't till the early 18th century that poets tend to become, by and large, sedentary slightly inactive types.

You could probably base an illuminating thesis on pinpointing the moment in literary history when for the first time the majority of writers could no longer ride a horse. (A wild guess: 1725.)

MrP