I'm interested only in the thought processes of poetry novices and
their thought processes as they heard or thought about Ms. Alexander's
poem. I'm also exploring whether the controversy surrounding the poem
might be good fodder for a class discussion of Piagetian theory.
I'm making a guess that most novices have a schema for the concept of
"poetry" which is that poems have rhythm and that the last words in
each sentence rhyme. If indeed that is your schema, then you probably
didn't like Ms. Alexander's poem (you might not even recognize it as a
poem if you read it). However, since Ms. Alexander was introduced as
a poet and she read her poem, and you saw some interesting imagery in
her words (for example, "...Sing the names of the dead who brought us
here, who laid the train tracks, raised the bridges...") then you
would have to change your schema of the concept of "poem" to include
that poems may not have rhythm or rhyme, but that they evoke
interesting images. So the first question is: Is adding into your
schema of "poetry" that "poetry is words that evoke images" an example
of assimilation or accommodation? I'm thinking assimilation.
Second question: if the poem did not evoke imagery for you (and I'm
hearing that many people did not see any imagery that they connected
with in the poem), but again you have been told that it is indeed a
"poem", then you would have to do a major redefinition of poetry as
"words that don't necessarily have rhythm, don't necessarily have
rhyme, don't always have evoke interesting imagery but that consists
of words that can move people emotionally" (or "words that can touch
people on a deep level"). This would be a major redefinition of a
concept. So: is this accommodation?
Michael Britt
[email protected]
www.thepsychfiles.com
On Jan 28, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Michael Palij wrote:
I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. If it is as simple as:
Does my schema for poems match the variety of poetic forms
that is used under the heading of "poetry"?
Well, the answer to that question is another question:
What is your expertise in poetry?
Though most people naively associated rhyming with
poetry, this hardly defines a poem is (though rhyming may be
important in children's literature). Consider the types of poetry
listed on the following websites:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_basic_poetry_topics
http://www.articleswave.com/articles/different-types-of-poetry.html
http://www.writersreliefblog.com/category/Types-of-Poetry.aspx
If you are a novice with respect to poetry or are only exposed
to "popular" forms of poetry (i.e., poetry that "sells", regardless
of whether poets and poetry scholars think), then the type of
poem that Alexander read probably doesn't correspond to your
prototype of a poem. However, if the only knowledge one has
about a topic is "novice level", then judgments about a topic,
especially art forms like poetry, film/cinema, theater, performance
art, etc., are probably going to be quite limited in scope and
"sophistication".
However, if you are asking whether people liked the poem,
independent of its artistic merits, then you're simply asking
about people preferences which is likely to geared toward
whatever is most popular or commonly available. I have to
ask, how many persons spend some time every day seeking
out and reading poems (and not just re-reading old favorites)?
The popular conception of poetry is likely to be quite limited
(as it is with music, films, television programs, etc.).
Perhaps you should present your post below to a poet or
a poetry scholar. I think they might ask you a variety of
questions about what you think a poem is as well as point
out the merits of Alexander's poem.
Finally, appreciating the qualities of a work of art or other
exquisite experiences (e.g., a good meal, a good wine, etc.)
will always be a matter of personal taste but this will be
conditioned by our experiences. For example, one may
acknowledge that Remy Martin cognac is recognized as
being a high quality alcoholic beverage but it is quite possible
that one thinks it tastes like cat piss (or what one imagine
that to be). Do we want to focus on the qualities of the
cognac and our ability to appreciate them or is it just a
matter of whether we like it or not?
In any event, this Bud's for you. ;-)
-Mike Palij
New York University
[email protected]
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 05:40:30 -0800, Michael Britt wrote:
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?
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([email protected])
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([email protected])
