Contemporary poems, and why I am starting to hate them.

[Vance]

Alright. I consider myself a person that can appreciate many forms of art. Including poems. But (I see another thread coming) there is something about contemporary poetry that strikes an off-key. This is what I hear. Blue sky sand land old indian woman silver-bird hair rolling corn on the mud-brick. Many years flowered memories drawn in the sand wrinkled hands pushing dough in, out, in, out, breathing heavily. This poem wins 4 awards and is praised all over America. Then: Young deer in the meadow nibbling anxiously listening always soft grass sun through trees I can't kill you twig snap moving bushes run away. This poem is shunned by the poetic community. This really bugs me. It's almost like a widespread snobbish impulse by the connesieurs of modern poetry, much like critics today, to enjoy the condemning of a poem and the widespread praising of another all to enhance your abstract poetic tastes that all other mortals have no blundering clue about. Granted, you yourself are merely putting up a fine show of acting like you know what the heck you are praising and condemning. As long as everyone praises the same thing and condemns the same thing it's all good. And then there are these poems: Run, run, run trees light dewey-drop leaves in the bush piano keys fail to contemplate the misery of the sting-thing. Run, run, run sticky gumdrop shoes kiss the mulched face of Earth-skin with patting lolly-smacks. The twisted face never shines on me and I cry and I run because I am running. A blanket in the air birds sing songs and laugh at me I hate this world and the sticky face most of all. 1. What is the main character worried about? 2. Why is it so important to him? 3. What is the significance of the shoes? 4. Why does he fear the twisted face? 5. What is the significance of it being sticky? 6. Write a 6 paragraph essay on how this relates to your life. Be sure to include details from the poem. Can someone please explain this to me?

[Serkat]

1. What is the main character worried about? 2. Why is it so important to him? 3. What is the significance of the shoesblade? 4. Why does he fear the twisted face? (Deacon Frost) 5. What is the significance of it being sticky? 6. Write a 6 paragraph essay on how this relates to your life. Be sure to include details from the poemmovie. LOL, are you fucking kidding me? I would never in a thousand lives waste my life on these kinds of assignments. I advise you to either wipe your ass on those and hand in a shit-stained piece of paper or, if need be, assume that the questions are about the movie Blade (which would make much more sense anyway and you'll probably get an A) Like one time I was expected to bring my horoscope, read it and compare to the actual day (this was in philosophy class, mind you). So I just wrote my own that said I would sit in a room and waste my time reading a horoscope. Because I seriously can't be assed to put up with this shitty excuse for education. I found all of the poems you posted utterly stupid, phonetically worthless and entirely meaningless. It's like it was generated by some website on the internet to put on your MySpace for lack of talent. Shoebox Ribbed cardboard Dusty but present. Memories Tears from yesterday Merging Floating Into the box Out of time This poem is about finding a shoebox with photos from your past in the attic and getting all emo about it. I can be poet now? I am very certain that what you said is correct. I've heard plenty of rap music 10 times as smart and eloquent as these sorry pieces of shit. I've also heard good poems but mostly by amateurs and people who got brains in their head and not people who basically exchange worthless lists of words to suck on each others buttholes afterwards because they can't find a day job.

[ClouD]

Poetry is about truth, from disguised meaning. Bypassing the general connotations, for a deeper understanding. Written in spontaneity, and from the heart and not the head.

[Serkat]

Poetry is about truth, from disguised meaning. Bypassing the general connotations, for a deeper understanding. Written in spontaneity, and from the heart and not the head. I definitely agree with this. I once read a nice piece that delved into this dichotomy. Society sees the artist as the slightly mental guy who spontaneously comes up with an idea out of nothing or strokes the brush in a pattern that he doesn't give much conscious thought to - and still manages to create magical artistry that appears to be finely planned out beforehand. And this is actually what art is about - mostly. It's about producing something without letting conscious thought and analysis interfere - instead capturing the very moment that the piece was produced in and the personality of the artist. But then, in school and universities, we ask "What was the artists intention? What does the artist want to point out? Why did the artist do X? What's the significance of Y?" as if the artist were a rigid businessman, eager to sell a finely designed product, specially customized for the student to think about. That's not the point at all. Which, in turn, results in people analyzing art (poetry) and basically talking nonsense without a halt, just seeing whatever they want to see.

[ClouD]

"...do you ask why a flower is beautiful?..." _____ All true artists, whether they know it or not, create from a place of no-mind, from inner stillness. ::: Eckhart Tolle ::: The beautiful is in nature, and it is encountered under the most diverse forms of reality. Once it is found it belongs to art, or rather to the artist who discovers it. ::: Gustave Courbet :::

[Patrick]

I understand what you're saying, Vance. I for one hate modern art... how anyone can look at something like a painting of a circle or three blank canvases and say it is beautiful is beyond me. And whilst the two poems you have compared are remarkably similar in style, and on the surface look pretty simple and obvious, I understand why the first one is considered as better. It seems like a little bit more work has gone into it's construction - although still not much. However, I still totally agree that art, poetry, fashion - it's all totally subjective. You just can't judge it on an objective level. That's why when art/poetry/fashion becomes very contemporary, it becomes more and more subjective - and objective judging loses all meaning. So display them in a gallery, sure, for people to make up their own opinions... but judging poetry like this is just pure stupidity.

[bluefinger]

I understand what you're saying, Vance. I for one hate modern art... how anyone can look at something like a painting of a circle or three blank canvases and say it is beautiful is beyond me. And whilst the two poems you have compared are remarkably similar in style, and on the surface look pretty simple and obvious, I understand why the first one is considered as better. It seems like a little bit more work has gone into it's construction - although still not much. However, I still totally agree that art, poetry, fashion - it's all totally subjective. You just can't judge it on an objective level. That's why when art/poetry/fashion becomes very contemporary, it becomes more and more subjective - and objective judging loses all meaning. So display them in a gallery, sure, for people to make up their own opinions... but judging poetry like this is just pure stupidity. Actually, you can analyse poetry or art in the sense that you can examine the grammatical structure of the poem in order to determine how the nuances are carried. Same goes with paintings, you can examine the techniques and styles to see how the artist created the piece. However, the content of the poem and painting are subjective. You compose poems in certain ways, or draw/paint in certain styles, but in the end it is the content that carries the piece. It is this that is subjective. So it isn't totally subjective... depends on the context of the analysis. You can't judge it in the sense of determining which one is better or not (unless there is a difference in the quality of the piece itself), but you can examine to see how the artist came to create the piece, etc. For something like modern art though... that's something else entirely

[JET73L]

This poem is problematic. Fracking stupid people, critiquing modern art. The circle drives the thought, the tryptic blanc we see a splash of blue. I'm so sorry the world is gone. A modern poem in science-fiction, based on the phrase "this poetry is problematic." Pointless, and I forget why I decided to write it instead of a less clear, more "fight the critic" poem, but then again so is most other modern art. At least art and poetry used to have to be aesthetically pleasing, and in most forms were required to make sense. Nowadays, the critics decide on the quality of a work based on the opinion of the most influential of the first couple of critics, rather than on any real quality at all. I've seen art that was pleasing to the eye lose in a competition to a canof rotting food, specificall becasue it was controversial, and refernced the fact that art never l;asts (which, stupidly, is the exact opposite of traditional artists and critics). As for the first couple of poems, I think the only reasoin the second one was abhorred by critics, aside from the modern her d mentality of said critics, is because it referenced hunting in a way that didn;t involve spirits of the f**** stupid stereotype perpetuated by books from the 1800s. Or possibly the word kill. And if any of those critics happened to have a freudian view on art, that first poem is writing (intentional use of the word) with sexual metaphor. Critics love that. hey love anythinjg that can bhe made into controversy.

[Vance]

The point is, people can express themselves any way they want, but my problem is the critics. Going into film, I see the full impact of the critic and the total load of cripe that goes into their reviews. They are much more interested in sounding smart and enhancing their personal status than giving an honest, unbiased opinion. Examples: (genuine reviews) Ratatoille: Ratatoille is one movie that doesn't serve. Vantage Point: Vantage Point is not a good film no matter how you look at it. Gladiator: ...a two-ring circus that fails as entertainment and stinks as a sermon. The Happening: There are some creepy moments but overall The Happening is a bit of a non-event. Oh, that's so hilarious. And that's not to mention the ones who literally can't appreciate any movie, the ones whose review history has not a single good thing to say about any film. (Or the ones who condemn any movie that does not stand up to their one holy film... cough*Sixth Sense*cough) If you go into the theatre with the intent to like a film, you will probably come out feeling a lot better. And then there are those needlessly scathing reviews. The point is, it makes them feel better inside when they don't like a film. it makes them feel like they have higher tastes. And the sad thing is it impacts the industry. A Knight's Tale was one movie that average audiences tended to like, but critics gleefully tore apart amongst themselves, thinking up new plays on words while sitting at their computer, then gleefully typing in and submitting their review with their greasy fingers. I say that you should NOT type anything that you would not tell the director, writer and actors PERSONALLY. When you stick to that, it usually comes out as constructive criticism. But when you have your little computer and your little account and that little review film button, sitting back in your chair trying to think up something smart and scathing that will make you look really badass, I hope theatres will get you a restraining order and keep your ungrateful ass out of a place where people try to enjoy themselves. Sorry for my rant, but I honestly had the intention of linking back to poetry. Truth is, same thing goes on there, except it is more community based, with each critic showing up the other. And there is something about the way they use the "finer arts" card that really pisses me off, like the poems they read are actually intended for a trained eye.

[AmazeO XD]

Balls Penis Testicles You are close to me We are one. OMG PULTZER PRIZE