[New-Poetry] Some Characteristics of Unclarity (long)

[Anny Ballardini]

your copyin' me your copin me
I ain't seen no typos
it's already on but will willingly barter for better copy

From: "TheOldMole" <Opus40-01 at opus40.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 10:31 PM


> I'm post it to mine, too.
>
> jforjames at aol.com wrote:
>>
>> Anny, you're welcome to use but let me clean up the typos and unclear 
>> parts. It was written quickly out
>> some thoughts provoked by this topic.
>> Finnegan
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Anny Ballardini <anny.ballardini at tin.it>
>> Bcc: jforjames at aol.com
>> Sent: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 3:19 pm
>> Subject: Re: [New-Poetry] Some Characteristics of Unclarity (long)
>>
>> I'm sending it to my blog! James let me know if you do not wish it there. 
>> From: "TheOldMole" <Opus40-01 at opus40.org <mailto:Opus40-01 at opus40.org>> 
>> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 9:10 PM
>> > I'm saving this one. jforjames at aol.com <mailto:jforjames at aol.com> 
>> > wrote:
>> >> The Poem May Be Unclear/Difficult/Obscure Because... Purposeful 
>> >> Evasion of Understanding The poem was not meant to be clear or 
>> >> understood in any
>> conventional >> sense. Purposefully the poet has crafted something that 
>> can’t be parsed >> or comprehended. It may have been out of fear that the 
>> reader would think >> the poet thin of mind, or it may be just the poet 
>> resists the idea that >> poems should be knowable in a conventional 
>> sense.
>> >>
>> >> It's All There With Enough Time, Effort, And The Will It may take you 
>> >> several hours, days or weeks, years or a lifetime,
>> but >> nothing in the poem is not stated or misexpressed in a way that it 
>> can >> never be comprehended or experienced fully. You might need a 
>> bigger >> dictionary or full encyclopedia set, or the ability to develop 
>> the >> emotional perspicacity of a Collette, but you can get there from 
>> here, >> eventually.
>> >>
>> >> Merely Readerly Failure The poem is reasonably clear and 
>> >> understandable if the various
>> references >> and allusions made in the poem can be recognized and 
>> grasped. But they >> can ‘t be: (a) Because you have different knowledge 
>> set or (b) you have a >> fairly low level of erudition. The latter is not 
>> elitism; it’s a fact >> that more you’ve read and studied, the more you’re 
>> likely to understand. >> Some poets prefer to throw a wide net; others 
>> are perfectly happy that >> only readers of a certain level of acumen 
>> will gain entry to the poem’s >> fullest sense.
>> >>
>> >> The Translation or Transference Problem The poem was perfectly clear 
>> >> in the poet’s mind, but, as rendered,
>> most >> readers can’t understand it. A translation/transference problem 
>> ocurred: >> words as ‘shabby equipment’, or the author’s inability to 
>> shape/make the >> kinds of sentences and language elements that would 
>> make the poem >> understandable across a wide & diverse group of readers.
>> >>
>> >> Mimesis Doesn’t Mean Clear Mimesis of the chaotic or confused: The 
>> >> world is chaotic, life is disorderly and imperfectly understood by the 
>> >> human mind, therefore
>> the >> poem can must mirror the disorder and the chaos. The jigsaw puzzle 
>>  >> spilled, with no attempt made to organize and piece it together.
>> >>
>> >> Pushing the Language To Its Limits With a vast vocabulary and 
>> >> syntactical inventiveness, the poet uses
>> the >> language in a way that is often hard to follow, to parse, to make 
>> sense >> of. Maybe the poet has pulled out all the stops or is pushing 
>> the >> envelope, so to speak. Think Hart Crane or Gerard Manley Hopkins. 
>> Or the >> way Wallace Stevens feels his way through a poem by thinking 
>> based more >> on sound than sense. Ordinary words can be apt neologisms 
>> in hands of >> certain poets. Gertrude Stein pressing ordinary rhetoric 
>> into the >> ‘surrhetorical’.
>> >>
>> >> The Attraction of The Fragmentary And Disruptive The aphoristic and 
>> >> imagistic attractiveness of certain sentences
>> and >> phrases are undeniable. So much so that some poets are content to 
>> string >> these elements together or splatter them about a page and just 
>> let them >> do what they may in the mind of the reader. Sometimes it’s 
>> just enjoyable >> to cut things up, the collage, the kaleidoscopic, the 
>> slamdance of words >> and syllables, to break sentences unexpectedly, to 
>> leave the reader >> hanging on ledge of words, to practice legerdemain in 
>> language.
>> >>
>> >> It’s Ineffable or Just Too Complicated The difficulty/obscurity of the 
>> >> subject matter or psychological
>> state >> that impelled the poem makes the poem difficult/obscure. The 
>> writer >> intended to be clearer but couldn’t manage and perhaps no 
>> writer will >> ever be capable of capturing the meaning/essence of it in 
>> words. The >> experience is real but ineffable. The emotionally driven 
>> lyric flight, or >> the speaker so surrendering to a language rending 
>> state that may verge on >> glossalalia, hysteria, or a speaking in 
>> tongues. Or, in fact, the subject >> matter is too great in scope and too 
>> multi-faceted or too deeply layered >> to ever be captured in language or 
>> in the space of a single poem or even >> a sequence of poems. Think of 
>> thee poem of America that Whitman almost
>> >> managed to write. One or More Possible Readings The poem is composed 
>> >> in such a way that perfectly good readers will
>> come >> away with vastly divergent notions of what the poem is about or 
>> trying to >> getting at. No one reading is correct; all represent valid 
>>  >> interpretations and experiences of the poem. The composition may have 
>>  >> been intentionally constructed to expose multiple facets and >> 
>> interpretative aspects. Or it just came out that way. Once the poem >> 
>> enters the public domain, whether the poet intended this is somewhat >> 
>> beside the point; though the poet has a right to be disappointed if >> 
>> his/her preferred interpretation/experience wasn’t carried over to the >> 
>> reader (which is related to translation/transference problem).
>> >>
>> >> Calling Attention To The Materiality of Language The poem is meant to 
>> >> be an experience of perception, rather than to
>> be >> understood. The experience being on the level of the materiality of 
>>  >> language (sound, alphabetic construct, shape, etc., being 
>> foregrounded) >> and consciously not employing the communicative elements 
>> of language >> offers. Sound poetry, pure poetry, certain forms of 
>> language poetry. Of >> course, many readers may experience it in many 
>> ways, which is generally >> not seen as a deficiency but as opportunity.
>> >>
>> >> It’s Surrealist, Fantastic or Dadaist The poem intentionally takes the 
>> >> reader into a place where things
>> aren’t >> clear in any ordinary sense, in order to give the reader some 
>> new and >> intriguing experience. Often employing extravagant 
>> collocations of things >> and weird imagery. It can be the dream poem 
>> rendered exactly as >> remembered stream-of-consciousness dictated. Or, 
>> as in dadaism, the >> wholesale rejection of poetry as anything more than 
>> a conceptual art or a >> socio-political act that should push, if not 
>> shove, the reader out of >> his/her complacency and literary comfort 
>> zone.
>> >> Strictly Experimental As To Form or Rule The poem is using a 
>> >> particular pattern or formal construct for its structure. The form is 
>> >> paramount, not the content. Poems based on a mathematical sequence, 
>> >> like a Fibonacci. Ignoring grammar and
>> syntax for >> effect. Or language games: Purposefully substituting a 
>> random noun >> wherever the verb is supposed go in the sentence, for 
>> example. It’s >> Oulipo, baby.
>> >>
>> >> Too Spare And It Becomes An Open System The poem is stripped down to a 
>> >> point that what words remain, as
>> clear as >> they are, invite or allow many different ways of fleshing out 
>> the poem in >> reader’s mind. Or the poem is a pane and now many people 
>> are now going to >> see many different things through it. The paradox of 
>> description: Too >> much and too detailed in description and the reader’s 
>> mind is not be >> given free rein to explore in and around what has been 
>> expressed, gets >> too lazy to tease out nuances. Too little descriptive 
>> guidance and all >> control of the reader’s experience and taking from 
>> the poem is >> surrendered, whether intentionally or unintentionally. 
>> _______________________________________________ New-Poetry mailing list 
>> New-Poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu <mailto:New-Poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu> 
>> http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/new-poetry ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail 
>> <http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/index.htm?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000970>!
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> New-Poetry mailing list
>> New-Poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu
>> http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/new-poetry
>>
>
> -- 
> Tad Richards
> http://www.opus40.org/tadrichards/
> http://opusforty.blogspot.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> New-Poetry mailing list
> New-Poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu
> http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/new-poetry
>