I'm putting together my notes for an episode which I'm thinking of
calling "Piaget and Poetry" (alliteration always works). I'd like to
get some feedback on the idea. It started when I watched and listened
to Elizabeth Alexander read her poem at the inaugural address. To be
honest, I just didn't care for it at all. I noticed that a lot of
people started leaving the event while she read the poem (although the
event was also running a bit long at that point as well). I thought
perhaps it was just me, but then I find that others didn't like it
either. David Ulin for the LA Times said it, "..simply didn't sing"
and Jon Stewart took a poke at it on the Daily Show when he said
about her poem, "Aren't these things supposed to rhyme?"
Since most students saw the inaugural (and hopefully the poem as well,
but if not there's always YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH6fC3W3YvA)
, maybe there's a connection here to Piaget. My early schema (which,
I suspect may be like a lot of students) for the idea of a "poem" was
just like Jon Stewart's: a series of words that have a certain rhythm
and that rhyme, like what you find in a birthday card or a limerick.
As I grew older I learned that poetry doesn't have to rhyme, but
usually there's a rhythm (assimilation?). Modern poems don't seem to
have a rhythm or rhyme, but they do evoke interesting mental images
through metaphor (accomodation?).
The problem with Alexander's poem is that it had no rhythm, no rhyme,
and it didn't evoke any interesting imagery for me. So, I guess I
just couldn't accommodate it into my "poem" schema. Thoughts? Have I
got this right?
Michael
Michael Britt
[email protected]
www.thepsychfiles.com
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([email protected])
