tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post4616877191894092236..comments2023-10-03T11:41:21.191+01:00Comments on The Truth About Lies: Responsorial poetryJim Murdochhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comBlogger22125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-51408906757815503162009-08-02T18:50:00.860+01:002009-08-02T18:50:00.860+01:00Okay, so now I've written on my blog a respons...Okay, so now I've written on my blog a response to the response to the responses to the response.<br /><br />Let me know when this gets too confusing, unless of course it's too late already. Meanwhile, another response.<br /><br />:)Art Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-45419562643577581902009-08-02T15:45:01.095+01:002009-08-02T15:45:01.095+01:00That's very cool, Glenn, and thanks.
Wow, thi...That's very cool, Glenn, and thanks.<br /><br />Wow, this image is getting more attention via poems being written about it than most of my other photos combined!<br /><br />I wonder if there are certain categories or types of images that evoke an ekphrastic response, while other images are so "finished" or "self-contained" that they not only don't "need" an ekphrastic response, they don't evoke one. I'm pretty sure that's an unanswerable question, but it might be worth thinking about some.Art Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-77266593467541506762009-08-02T08:56:15.250+01:002009-08-02T08:56:15.250+01:00Excellent response, Glenn. Now that is exactly the...Excellent response, <b>Glenn</b>. Now that is exactly the kind of thing I was hoping for. Yes, I suppose the arrows <i>do</i> look like a mouth. I never saw that. Yes. Very good indeed.Jim Murdochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-50764271937993945292009-08-02T03:19:29.970+01:002009-08-02T03:19:29.970+01:00The mouth opens black
under an inaccessible sky.
Y...The mouth opens black<br />under an inaccessible sky.<br />You look at the mouth,<br />black and open like that,<br />no way into it.<br />You're considering the ways<br />you might get away from it.<br />There’s left<br />and right<br />and back the way you came.<br />You could walk under it, too,<br />duck right under its big black gape,<br />those two broad teeth poised to bite,<br />one tooth to each stiff jaw.<br />You could stop,<br />and with an open palm,<br />whack that mouth -<br />whang!<br />Then on into the unfenced field,<br />leave the road stopped before the mouth<br />that’s going to bite, looks like, <br />going to bite a piece off and swallow it.<br />You’d be brave,<br />marching down the throat of that future,<br />past where any road’s allowed.Glenn Ingersollhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10674475308395975995noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-78425507968996398672009-08-01T08:23:30.597+01:002009-08-01T08:23:30.597+01:00What I felt about my poem here, Art, is that it ne...What I felt about my poem here, <b>Art</b>, is that <i>it</i> needs your photo to complete it. You poem is complete on its own, it's 'completed' by the addition of your own poem (it then becomes a separate thing) and it's also 'completed' by my poem (becoming something else). It's like me, I'm an individual and yet my wife 'completes' me; we become something greater than the sum of our parts. <br /><br />The thing about my poem is that it was never an individual. It was designed to compliment your poem and in that respect it 'completes' it. On its own there's something missing.<br /><br />Intent is an interesting issue. I had no intent when I wrote my poem. It was a response just as I'll respond to something I experience or a line of dialogue off the tele. Only when it was complete did I start to think about what it was I'd created.Jim Murdochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-53896485741454212472009-08-01T05:20:16.574+01:002009-08-01T05:20:16.574+01:00To return to the original questions of this essay,...To return to the original questions of this essay, and some of the on-topic responses to it (meta-responses?), I just want to point out that when I write a poem in response to a photograph, which I do often with my own photos, as Jim mentions, I'm also aware that there have been occasions when an illustration was a response to the poem.<br /><br />It's not, for me, a question of the photo "needing" the poem, or of a poem "needing" and illustration. The response is its own thing—it's not a question of need at all, but a question of, well, desire. Most such responses arise spontaneously. They're not planned-out, they're often unintended.<br /><br />I get the sense that some folks think this is all very intentional, very planned. The truth is that planning and intention are not engaged at all in this kind of response. They just happen. I look at something, and words arise in my mind. Or I read something, and respond to it.<br /><br />Every time I read a poem by Rumi, in recent years, I feel moved to respond with a poem. Rumi makes me want to "talk back" to him: usually in my own version of what he says, to underline the truth I find there. Not typically in contradiction or defiance, but most typically in affirmation or validation.<br /><br />When I edit my own photos, when I work with them—which is a process of looking at them carefully, with mindfulness and full attention—it's not uncommon for me to see things I wasn't aware of when I first made the photo. Often I am surprised, in a good way. <br /><br />In my experience, I find that poets much more than painters or photographers—perhaps it's a function of verbal language being the elemental medium that makes up the art—tend to think that intention is primary. That we never set out to do something unless we really want to. I can say truthfully that many of my very best photos have been complete "accidents"—rather, to be more precise, they have been created without my personality-ego being engaged in the process. They have been made indeterminantly, which is a way for me to get out of my own way, and let the larger (preconscious, nonverbal, hidden, shadow) self make the photo.<br /><br />Often I see something that catches my attention, and I make a quick photo. This produces good photos just as often as when I take my time, really LOOK at the subject first, and only then make the image. Both ways of working yield good results. And the latter way of working is still not an intellectual process in any way. It's rather a form of empathy, or merging, with the subject. You sort of feel your way into the image, and when the moment is ripe, you snap the shutter. It's not planned, it's patient.Art Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-51845049995728292152009-07-30T17:59:13.106+01:002009-07-30T17:59:13.106+01:00(part two)
The whole point of post-modernism was ...(part two)<br /><br />The whole point of post-modernism was to reveal that the dominant paradigm has no innate value superior to any of its sub-paradigms. So, if you really want to talk about post-modernism in literature, let's talk about how mainstream lit continues to beat the dead horse of its lost assumed superiority over all other "non fine art literary" writing genres. No one likes being knocked off the seat of central power. Some of the critical reactions against "genre lit" from the mainstream are so obviously reactionary and defensive that it's laughable. <br /><br />Does that make "The Time Traveler's Wife" a post-modern novel? I argue that it doesn't—except to those ignorant of these same styles and tropes having long been used in "genre lit" as opposed to in "fine art (mainstream) lit." I don't think TTW is remotely postmodern fiction; I think it's a decent crossover novel, which I enjoyed reading, not much more than that. The only thing PM about it is the non-linear narrative form. Ten years before TTW, Michele West published a brilliant high-fantasy duology of novels, "Hunter's Oath" and "Hunter's Death" (which I've re-read twice for pleasure, a marker for me of good writing), in which one of the central characters is similarly cut loose from linear time. How that affects here, and the other characters, is one of the central plot points of the novels. Once again, so much for PM's originality. <br /><br />And it was a great SF writer, Theodore Sturgeon, in fact, who coined Sturgeon's Law, which states: "Ninety percent of science fiction—heck, of everything—is crap." Pick a genre where that isn't true—there aren't any. One thing that sets great SF writers apart from many fine art literary writers is that the SF writers don't have any literary ambitions or pretensions. :)<br /><br />As for what we bring to what we read, you won't hear many US critics mentioning Doctor Who in their reviews of "The Time Traveler's Wife." LOL That's a comment that does indeed indicate a Pond-wide separation of viewpoints. (For the record, many SF fans *would* know about Doctor Who, but again, most US reviewers wouldn't. Just more of that same ignorance.)Art Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-74110171900578797852009-07-30T17:59:03.537+01:002009-07-30T17:59:03.537+01:00Nothing wrong with potted opinions. :) As long a...Nothing wrong with potted opinions. :) As long as one keeps one's mind to alternate possibilities, of course.<br /><br />On the other hand, I've been around two sociopaths in my life, family members who were such, and three friends who I knew were diagnosed with borderline personality disorder. Henry is not a psychotic in any classically diagnosable sense, based on the psychological standards. He is much, much more like a Vietnam veteran who loses it from time to time: highly traumatized, in his case ongoing trauma from an early age, coping with post-traumatic stress disorder, and when he's violent it's in ways I recognize from having seen similar personality types in real life. I knew a 'Nam vet who who would destroy any opponent in a bar fight simply to end the fight as fast and cleanly as possible; he had trouble determining when to let himself go berserker, and when not to, but then, most real berserkers do have that trouble. (Read the Viking sagas, which are full of examples.) He also does feel remorse—which is something a genuine psychotic never does. So for me he remains a sympathetic, understandable character, because of people I've known from real life. (Any writer who really wants to understand trauma and its effects on people, I recommend volunteering at a veteran's hospital, or a burn unit, or an emergency room, or a chemo ward. Spent my share of time in those, and learned some HUGE life-lessons.)<br /><br />I'm not one of those SF fans who stridently defend SF's literary qualities at all costs, all the time—Sturgeon's Law was coined *about* SF after all (see below)—nor am I any sort of apologist for SF. SF doesn't need apologizing for. Still, what there IS in SF that's of high literary qualified simply gets ignored by mainstream critics. ("Mainstream literature" is itself a genre, to be blunt.) So while I agree that literary snobbery can go both ways, the truth is, more snobbery comes from the dominant paradigm than the "genre" as a rule, in any given case, with any given sub-paradigm. It's as true for "chick lit" and "immigrant lit" as it is for "SF lit."Art Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-13287275754567833212009-07-30T10:08:14.006+01:002009-07-30T10:08:14.006+01:00Art -
Henry enjoying kicking the living daylight...Art - <br /><br />Henry enjoying kicking the living daylights out of another man who called him names, and again going back to kick a guy taped to a tree - for enjoyment, and then contrast that to his fondness for Laura Ashley sheets, is at least odd. <br /><br />I agree, there is too much uninformed and negative criticism levied at SF. All too often critics make judgements without, I suspect, having read much SF. There is a lot of literary snobbery which gets in the way of genuine criticism. There is also a tendency for SF fans to jump down the throats of anyone who is not immediately seeming to hail the praises of SF's literary merits.<br /><br />I offer, not a review, or indeed a measured critique - merely a potted opinion. I am almost through the novel and cannot discern a difference in Henry or Claire's narrative voice. My opinion, thus far, is that it is Mills & boon meets Doctor Who, with literary allusions bolted on. And I hope Niffenegger got paid for mentioning Laura Ashley and Random House, too! <br /><br />As I understand, the film rights were sold before the book was finished - the book, I feel, reads more like a screenplay than a novel...On the whole, I feel its merits outweigh its failings. I look forward, now, to the film. <br /><br />As for the poetry....:)Rachel Fentonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10046917627054462214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-6878510185314605332009-07-30T06:27:48.182+01:002009-07-30T06:27:48.182+01:00Thank you for your comment, Angel and I've see...Thank you for your comment, <b>Angel</b> and I've seen your site before. Yes, you clearly put a lot of effort into getting the right picture to illustrate your poems. This, however, is <i>not</i> ekphrastic poetry. Ekphrastic poetry is poetry written which is <i>inspired</i> by works of art; having an image of that art is not necessarily part of the poem as in the case with the ode I mentioned.Jim Murdochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-7612240563894620462009-07-30T03:40:43.198+01:002009-07-30T03:40:43.198+01:00Rachel, I don't view Henry as psychopathic, ju...Rachel, I don't view Henry as psychopathic, just someone who has to do desperate things in order to survive. I'm quite certain they'll play all that down in the movie, though, just as you suspect they probably will.<br /><br />My guess is that you'll discern how Henry and Claire's character voices are different, as you get further along. The thing about the novel that's interesting, too, is how it moves around in time, just as Henry does. It's non-linear and non-chronological, which makes it non-traditional in terms of standard, linear narrative. The thing is, while mainstream lit crit hails that as innovative and post-modern, in fact it's very much a tool invented by the Modernists, and not at all PM. <br /><br />PM critics have this bad habit of claiming credit for inventing techniques that have been around a long time—especially in what the mainstream often likes to denigrate as "genre fiction." That's almost always a pejorative term when I hear a "mainstream" (i.e. fine-art Literary) critic employ it. The bias inherent is obvious.<br /><br />So I understand what you mean about "postmodern novels," but as I've said many times before: the PM non-linear novel was pretty much invented by fabulists—in fantasy, SF, and metafiction. I'm thinking of Borges, Delany, Zelazny, LeGuin, Joanna Russ, and numerous others. <br /><br />What's so amusing about PM authors claiming to have invented the non-linear narrative is that I can almost always point to examples in SF and metafiction that pre-date their "inventions" by many years. What this says to me is that most of these critics are pretty much just ignorant of the literary innovations that have been employed for decades by "genre" writers. In certain cases, ignorant at best; dismissive at worst. (I wrote a blog post about this subject, too, recently. It's not quite a pet peeve, but it was reawakened in my peeves corner by the critical over-praising of McCarthy's "The Road," which from my viewpoint is incredibly unoriginal and derivative. I even proved that to a couple of well-known blog critics—and got roundly ignored for doing so. LOL )Art Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-34600812549937558812009-07-29T12:49:42.507+01:002009-07-29T12:49:42.507+01:00Part of the fun of writing for me has been finding...Part of the fun of writing for me has been finding the perfect picture to go along with my post or poem, and I'm often inspired by photographs and paintings. I never knew it was called anything so fancy;)Angelahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05748840293468845389noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-38498707417518779212009-07-29T09:28:54.533+01:002009-07-29T09:28:54.533+01:00Rachel, I could talk for hours on this subject. Wh...<b>Rachel</b>, I could talk for hours on this subject. What gets me is when they decide to reboot brands that should have been one-hit wonders <i>at best</i>. I'm talking here about <i>Halloween</i>, <i>Friday the 13th</i> and <i>A Nightmare on Elm Street</i> all of which spawned several sequels and are now on their second run around the block. Why, for God's sake? And then there was that remake of <i>Psycho</i> that added nothing but colour to the original being a faithful blow-by-blow copy with an inferior cast.<br /><br />I've never read <i>The Time Traveller's Wife</i> so I'll not be able to comment on its film adaptation although, like you, I virtually never go to the cinema these days. I made one exception recently to see <i>The Dark Knight</i> and guess what I got in my Xmas stocking?<br /><br /><b>McGuire</b>, keep your pictures. They enhance your posts. If you ever get the pieces published they'll most likely not be illustrated but you can't be sure of that. I've had magazines pop though my letterbox only to find a picture beside my poem that I would never have chosen in a month of Sunday. That said, although I always have plenty of pictures in my posts I don't think I've ever used one as an illustration to a poem. I used a granite head when I posted my poem about my dad but it wasn't illustrating the poem <i>per se</i>. <br /><br />This is a bit off-topic though. This article was about artwork that came <i>first</i>. Keep your pictures. They brighten up your blog.<br /><br />And, <b>Art</b>, you're very welcome. Just a part of my master plan to get everyone reading your blog to take the pressure off me feeling I have to comment on every post. Seriously though, you have a lot to say and I wish more would find you.<br /><br />Yes, we <i>do</i> differ – in so many ways – and I sometimes feel quite out of my depths reading your stuff but then we've had very different lives. I'm not going to learn much by reading a blog written by another sad git like me, am I? No, you talk about stuff that is new and interesting and stimulating and, as you know, this is not the first poem I've been inspired to write after one of your posts.Jim Murdochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-43687974199886054792009-07-29T07:17:59.768+01:002009-07-29T07:17:59.768+01:00I have a sinking suspicion that the film of the TT...I have a sinking suspicion that the film of the TTW will be all rosy tinted love story and ignore the psychopathic tendencies of Henry...actually, the book ignores his psychopathic tendencies, too, from the third of the book I've read so far. Bit of a worry there...I love the structure - postmodern novels are my thing more than SF, really, skitting about, little fragments, that I love...unbelievable characters though....hmn...so far it seems as though Henry is written with the same narrative voice as Claire..I'll reserve judgement till I've read the whole thing..I'll have a look for your review Art.Rachel Fentonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10046917627054462214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-41774451514740213172009-07-29T02:54:32.728+01:002009-07-29T02:54:32.728+01:00I wrote a review of "The Time Traveler's ...I wrote a review of "The Time Traveler's Wife" on my blog after having read it twice. I thought it quite good. I thought that most of the reviews once again revealed an utter lack of knowledge about SF, which I discussed in my review.<br /><br />I'm not really looking forward to the movie, because despite what some might think, not every book MUST be made into a movie. That everything IS made into a movie tells me that Hollywood has a real lack of creative thinking at home, so they have to parasitically go looking to other media. Some might argue that that's always been true. But in the past, many more original screenplays were produced, and some even won awards. Actually, one reason the indie film movement began 30 or so years ago was to film more original scripts, rather than adaptations. The reality is, since the film industry got taken over by those more interested in making profits than in making films, the choices made have been increasingly conservative, artistically, and less risk-taking overall.<br /><br />Maybe they'll do a good version of this book. I'll suspend judgment till then. But I'm not holding my breath.Art Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-9645507295344573872009-07-29T02:48:42.755+01:002009-07-29T02:48:42.755+01:00Thanks for the mention, and for being "made a...Thanks for the mention, and for being "made an example of." It's quite a compliment, really.<br /><br />I think one area in which we differ as poets is our topics and styles. That's pretty fundamental. But I also think both styles and topics are valid—poetry is a very big tent, with room for a lot of variation and possibility. <br /><br />This was fun to read. I rarely get much feedback about what I do artistically, ever, so this was doubly fun for me.Art Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-58474432539562903972009-07-29T01:59:29.350+01:002009-07-29T01:59:29.350+01:00McGuire - From what I've gathered, most blogge...McGuire - From what I've gathered, most bloggers like to see pictures...I know some who don't like posts without pictures...you should do what ever you like - it's your blog! It is entirely subjective. I think anyone who read your poems and thought you had written them about the pictures would not have appreciated your poems in the first place! I like the idea of posting a seemingly irrelevant picture with a poem though...if that poem you mention is on your blog I will read it...so far the one about the apples is my favourite, fwiw...'they know how to fall'...beautiful...<br /><br />Jim - Personal Velocity sounds like it's moving up my 'to read' pile!Rachel Fentonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10046917627054462214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-47465377159342074482009-07-28T14:00:14.451+01:002009-07-28T14:00:14.451+01:00You see, I only have one poem that is a direct tra...You see, I only have one poem that is a direct translation of a poem; it's called: Boy at the zoo. But other than that everything I write has no relation to any photograph. Sometimes I worry about paring them with photos because readers might think I have simply selected a photo and wrote about it. When in reality the poem stands alone, I write it entirely without recourse to a picture, it is only when I decide to put it on the blog that I spend a long time hunting through the internet looking for the precise picture that compliments the poem. <br /><br />I feel a bit chea simly paring ictures with my poems but the poems stand by themselves, the pictures are merely to signify the general idea of the poem and to give the reader something to look at. I sometimes think I should have no pictures what so ever but it's just to add a bit of colour and interesting visual. <br /><br />I hate seeing the film based on a book first. But then, so many books I read would never be made into films. It kind of corrupts my understanding when I read the book after the film. Mind you, I really enjoy the film of tin drum and I loved the book too. <br /><br />God, I'm a bit concerned about the pictures adorning my blog now. Should they stay or should they go now? <br /><br />A picture is shared <br />between ten thousand eyes. <br />A page one thousand words.McGuirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03095242258892600138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-89237678937593774412009-07-28T09:50:57.402+01:002009-07-28T09:50:57.402+01:00There are a number of 'classic' films that...There are a number of 'classic' films that have (for me) been ruined by the re-makes alone for that reason, Jim, and I do prefer to read the book before I see a film adaptation - even though I like to regard the film as a separate entity from the book altogether - which is why I'm furiously reading The Time Traveller's Wife; next will be The Vitners Luck...and at some point I'll get the films out on DVD because I'm so far behind I'll have missed the cinema!Rachel Fentonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10046917627054462214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-27837405764132529572009-07-28T06:29:13.558+01:002009-07-28T06:29:13.558+01:00Thanks for the feedback there, Titus. This was a v...Thanks for the feedback there, <b>Titus</b>. This was a very new experience for me. But that's the great thing about interacting with so many different poets online, they stimulate me to try new things.<br /><br />And, <b>Rachel</b>, I guess I'm the same. It was very interesting reading <a href="http://jim-murdoch.blogspot.com/2009/07/personal-velocity.html" rel="nofollow"><i>Personal Velocity</i></a> recently because I had images of the women in my head and then I got to watch the film and see how someone else imagined them. The third part of the film I hadn't read so when it came to reading that story in the book all the images had been set out for me. It didn't spoil it but it might have. It's like seeing <i>One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest</i> and trying afterward to imagine anyone other that Jack Nicholson as McMurphy – quite impossible.Jim Murdochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-7482234316359761962009-07-27T23:38:22.888+01:002009-07-27T23:38:22.888+01:00You see, I like things better without the pictures...You see, I like things better without the pictures...hence so few on my own blog...but I think most people like the image with the poem...but I see the pictures of my own words simultaneously, in my mind's eye as I read/write...very interesting and thought provoking...Rachel Fentonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10046917627054462214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-20651618581271925912009-07-27T17:29:14.283+01:002009-07-27T17:29:14.283+01:00Very interesting musings, and pertinent to somethi...Very interesting musings, and pertinent to something I'm working on at the moment: an exhibition of written responses to a sculptor's work. Thank you Jim, I shall tease the distinctions out in my own mind for quite a while, I suspect.Titushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16380213493011623153noreply@blogger.com