A lot of talk these days on blogs & listservs re: accessible poems and inaccessible poems. It seems that most people prefer to read one or the other. I don't break poems up that way. Any poem that makes me forget where I am and pulls me in completely does it for me, regardless of how it pulls me in (language, image, music, story). Apparently, this is not the case for a lot of others. I'm still trying to wrap my mind around this sudden enlightenment, because personally I would be bored to death reading just one type of poetry. I'm actually grateful that there is so much going on these days and so many poets publishing. Just my 'things that make you go, hmmm,' thought for the day.
9 comments:
Thanks for stopping by, Dick. I'm afraid I'm not sure which poems you are referring to?
I've been reading about this as a way of thinking about audience. I'm with you though, that it's fantastic that there is a wide variety of poety to read. It seems in my own writing, my poems also range from easy to less accessible. But I do want to communicate with my reader; I want the readers to "get" what I'm trying to express. I think some of the more "accessible" poem, like some of B.C.'s work, is though to be so because people are taking it at face value and not thinking about the metaphorical reading. The poem that comes to mind starts off with a list of items like "you are the bread and the wine." When you stop to puzzle out the metaphors, it's pretty amazing what that seemingly simple poem says.
Best,
Amy
I can't even tell any more, which poems are accessible and which aren't. I can't tell in my own work, I mean. Or anyone else's for that matter. I think my poems are prefectly clear but I am finding that my readers (you know who you are) find them inaccessible and difficult to penetrate. Maybe it's my readers (^^waves at readers^^), or maybe I'm dense. This makes me suspect that accessible/inaccessible doesn't really exist, not really, because, like everything else, the concept is relative. I dunno. I probably need to go ride my bicycle. In fact, that's exactly what I'm going to do.
And one more thing (she turns at the door, like Columbo, in her soiled raincoat, points a finger, cocks her glass eye in Suzanne's direction), even poems that have no narrative tissue, are simply a soup of words can be accessible to me if they're musical. I access them that way, through the music,the sound.
I'm sorry I couldn't squeeze these all into one post. Sheesh. I think the only poems that are inaccessible to me are poems that are poorly written. Or mediocre, even. Those are inaccessible poems.
I agree, Amy. Simple doesn't always mean *simple.*
Brilliant Rebecca, thank you!
I have to agree with you, Suzanne. Poems are as varied as the poets who write them. Variety is spice. We may have preferences, obviously, but those preferences needn’t be exclusive. We have to accept range and difference in poetry as we must in everyday life. I think all else is politics. King-of-the-Mountain stuff, you know?
Alberto
Paula,
Your closing line made laugh, but actually that's a very good point.
Alberto,
I'm so glad others chimed in here, I was beginning to think I was mad, or had really weird taste. *lol*
Dick,
Oh! Thanks so much. (blush) I have a recent chap out, Red Paper Flower, that has about 26 pgs of poems. Not much new work online right now though. Thanks again. :-)
Post a Comment