Regarding Stewart's critique of Alexander's poetry, he was poking fun at everyone in the inaugaration?! I certainly wouldn't take his perspective on this work of art as coming from a qualified critic. I personally found her selection moving and poignant. As per Mike's post, our opinions of any work of art is necessarily subjective.
Joan [email protected] > 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])
