tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post553744664337925478..comments2023-10-03T11:41:21.191+01:00Comments on The Truth About Lies: Poetry and art (part three)Jim Murdochhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-15622039497241841282008-11-14T00:55:00.000+00:002008-11-14T00:55:00.000+00:00Oh, Spike is wonderful. He actually wrote some ver...Oh, Spike is wonderful. He actually wrote some very good poetry, as you probably know.<BR/><BR/>I thought I saw Jesus on a tram.<BR/>I said, 'Are you Jesus?'<BR/>He said, 'Yes I am.'<BR/><BR/>I've remembered that poem since I first read it, there's something haunting about it. Sorry this comment is a bit off topic, feel free to unmoderate it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-5718946034000060532008-11-13T09:15:00.000+00:002008-11-13T09:15:00.000+00:00Thanks for that, Paul, that is what I was aiming f...Thanks for that, <B>Paul</B>, that is what I was aiming for, well, more of an overview to be honest - the subject is too huge to try and cover even over three posts. It's something I have every intention of returning to in the future but then I've been planning on writing a post on Spike Milligan for almost a year now and still haven't got round to it.Jim Murdochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-59305546863383509912008-11-13T05:20:00.000+00:002008-11-13T05:20:00.000+00:00These three articles form a fantastic resource. Th...These three articles form a fantastic resource. The subject is one which has fascinated me for a long time. Thanks for the tremendous attention to detail and the enormous amount of work gathering the links. You've done a brilliant job.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-8873915643729815492008-08-13T09:05:00.000+01:002008-08-13T09:05:00.000+01:00Behold the union of the warped of mind and spirit!...Behold the union of the warped of mind and spirit! <BR/>Yes, that makes more sense then, Art. Beware the wandering divide!Rachel Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11803852725693518924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-89585118410252193082008-08-13T01:05:00.000+01:002008-08-13T01:05:00.000+01:00Rachel, I'd never say that Monty Python wasn't art...Rachel, I'd never say that Monty Python wasn't art, or only entertainment. I grew up on the stuff, and it molded, er, warped me for life. But that's precisely my point, and that's what makes it art rather than entertainment: it changes you. Art disturbs, changes, molds, gets under your skin.<BR/><BR/>I never said there was a clear distinction. But I think it is necessary to think about the distinction, and how it plays out.<BR/><BR/>There is of course creativity behind art AND entertainment. The difference is how the audience responds: actively or passively. I think it's a good possibility that art is something that you respond to actively, while entertainment is passive. This isn't to say that we will all agree on what art is, or isn't. Of course not. But I think this is a good thing to think about—especially as artists.Art Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-52065864759209707482008-08-12T23:01:00.000+01:002008-08-12T23:01:00.000+01:00Ken, I'd really like to meet the writer who knows ...<B>Ken</B>, I'd really like to meet the writer who knows what he's writing about. You'll know this yourself. You start off writing with one thing in mind and the words just wander off on their own. That's why I've been having such a problem with what I'm working on right now. I've been trying to drive the words in one direction and they don't make sense when I do. Intent is one thing but the best things I've written have simply started with an idea, a few words usually, that I have let run to their natural conclusion.Jim Murdochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-1798839449738245052008-08-12T21:28:00.000+01:002008-08-12T21:28:00.000+01:00Dave puts his finger on my pulse as usual (jees, t...Dave puts his finger on my pulse as usual (jees, that sounds odd... never mind!)...<BR/><BR/>'The meaning comes later' can be such a truism of creative writing, I think, but lots of people don't seem to get it.<BR/><BR/>You have to be able to think that you're starting out writing one thing and then discover, as you go along, that you're actually writing something completely different. In this way the sub-conscious can be let play in your work.<BR/><BR/>('Shouldn't have had that last handful of M and M's)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-25204003212652434562008-08-12T20:30:00.000+01:002008-08-12T20:30:00.000+01:00Sorry, Dave, that's not one of mine but it is a go...Sorry, <B>Dave</B>, that's not one of mine but it is a good quote which is why I included it. I see visual art as an unholy marriage that somehow manages to work some of the time. But I've never found a piece yet that I can experience over and over again the way I can stand-alone works of art or musical compositions.<BR/><BR/>People can list of their top ten concertos, novels, films, paintings but I couldn't name my top one visual or concrete poem. I would have been hard pushed to even name a visual or a concrete poem before I wrote this article and, give me a few days, and I won't even be able to remember any of them. But 'Mr. Bleaney' affects me <I>every single time</I> I read the poem and I probably know it by heart. There are no tricks, no fancy images, just raw poetry.<BR/><BR/>As for the floor poem 'Walkabout', maybe if I'd seen it in its original setting it might do more for me but I will forget it. Strangely enough <A HREF="http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/pollock/lavender-mist/pollock.lavender-mist.jpg" REL="nofollow"><I>Lavender Mist</I></A> is a painting I'd happily hang on my wall. Now, why that one and not the other? Indeed why that one and not one of Pollock's other paintings?<BR/><BR>Jim Murdochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-58960326478419010322008-08-12T19:51:00.000+01:002008-08-12T19:51:00.000+01:00I agree with Jim...it might be helpful if we could...I agree with Jim...it might be helpful if we could make a strict divide with art/creativity on one side of it and entertainment on the other but I'm really not sure we can (well, I can't...it depends who I'm talking to, who is making the divide...and many, many other factors). Take one of Jim's favourites...Monty Python - it's very entertaining...but just because it's humour (and successful and popular) are we going to say it isn't art or creative work? Again you end up in that awkward area...everyone has a different idea of what qualifies as art, Art!Rachel Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11803852725693518924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-89892395864512567262008-08-12T19:15:00.000+01:002008-08-12T19:15:00.000+01:00Depends on the concert. Some are far more interact...Depends on the concert. Some are far more interactive than others, and some artists invite it. The fact that interaction is still considered radical is symptomatic of the mindset that I have a problem with. I have been to plenty of concerts where the audience IS invited to interact with the performers. I've played several such concerts myself.<BR/><BR/>Of course you're more likely to get this at an "experimental music" concert than you are at your average coffeeshouse folk gig or arena rock concert. But that's perhaps another aspect of the mindset that I have a problem with: the mindset that already has decided that such things aren't feasible or doable or desirable.Art Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-6123873232383861982008-08-12T19:01:00.000+01:002008-08-12T19:01:00.000+01:00Keeping up the standard I see! Got off to a good s...Keeping up the standard I see! Got off to a good start with the quote from Miro, "The meaning comes later". That sounds glib, but I think it is actually very profound. I really loved the "Leaving Home for Good" and the floor poems. You were saying last week about being bugged by not getting things about which you see others enthusing. I have always been that way with visual poetry (and concrete poetry), but I think your contribution here, particularly the "line and language in the same space" explanation has pushed the door open a chink - maybe more than a chink. Thanks for that.Dave Kinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08430484174826768488noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-8868662235858747662008-08-12T18:59:00.000+01:002008-08-12T18:59:00.000+01:00Art, I've listened/watched/read through winter mid...<B>Art</B>, I've listened/watched/read through <I>winter midwinter midlife life</I> and my gut feeling was more one of confusion than anything else. I wanted to know how to interact with this, especially the audio pieces. At first I tried letting the music play as I read but then I'd hit another piece before the first one had finished. I felt a bit like when I read <I>A Clockwork Orange</I> flicking back and forward between the text and the glossary. Probably a better comparison would be having to eat a meal that's in three different rooms, the meat in one, the potatoes in another and the veg in a third. Bringing the whole piece together as an animation would have made me feel a lot happier about it.<BR/><BR/>As for the whole art / entertainment divide – if I'm not entertained by art then I would question how good the art is. It's semantics again, ruddy semantics. I think the word 'entertainment' has been devalued over the years because of what is presented to us in the name of entertainment. I doubt that the writer of <I>Donnie Darko</I> would consider his film 'art' but it certainly makes you think.<BR/><BR/>Interactivity is an option. When I go and watch a play or listen to a concert I don't interact with the performers. I don't expect to, I wouldn't like to and they wouldn't appreciate it if I did … unless you count a bit of polite applause at the end as interaction. I'm not a bit fan of interaction. I think of a work of art as something that some man or woman has done on their own and presented to me for my … let's say 'consideration'. I'm always annoyed by works of art where I find the artist hasn't done the work himself but just left instructions for others to assemble the piece and I don’t know why that should bother me because that's all a musical score is; all composers can't be Mike Oldfield. And I did used to enjoy playing other people's music and not just my own.<BR/><BR/>I do agree with you totally about the pen and the paintbrush. We can put too much of an emphasis on the tools that today's artists/writers/composers have available to them. But you're right – a cooling off period is needed. I remember seeing David Hockney playing with what was basically an early version of <I>Paint</I> years ago and really what he produced was nothing to write home about because he was still too enthralled with the process.<BR/><BR/>Just look at the art that gets produced in <I>Photoshop</I> these days. I would love to get better at it than I am but I spend enough time glued to a keyboard. If I'm going to take on a hobby then it'll have to be something physical before I lose the use of my legs completely. The trouble is computers are such <I>damn</I> fun.<BR/><BR>Jim Murdochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-2571762843129536722008-08-12T16:40:00.000+01:002008-08-12T16:40:00.000+01:00Artists have always used technology for making art...Artists have always used technology for making art. What else is a pencil? What else is a paintbrush? The point is that the tools must serve the art, not vice versa.<BR/><BR/>In other words, and here I'm speaking as an artist who has always used technology to make art, some artists learn the technology and discover what art can be made using it. It requires an exploration process, certainly, and a lot os sketching that needs not to finalized art but to failed attempts. At some point, however, the technology has been learned, or internalized, enough that the artist doesn't have to think about it anymore, and gets on with focusing attention on the art itself.<BR/><BR/>Stated another way: with new technologies, there is often a period that I call the "gee whiz! look what I can do!" period, when the tools are being discovered. After that settles down a bit, some people start making genuine art with the new tools. They have to incorporate them into their working process.<BR/><BR/>I'll tell you this, though. I was not a good painter or draughtsman. (Although I'm learning to draw now.) Then computer-assisted art-making tools came along. Adobe Photoshop allowed me to make the images that I saw in my mind's eye so that other people could also see them. Photoshop enabled me to overcome a personal handicap, in other words. So this is one case in which the technology was incredibly freeing and incredibly stimulating.<BR/><BR/>Technology is technology. It's what you DO with it that matters.Art Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-63307427389155497102008-08-12T16:30:00.000+01:002008-08-12T16:30:00.000+01:00One thing I want to be clear about, and one reason...One thing I want to be clear about, and one reason I tried doing that poem as multi-media with hypertext links rather than presenting it as a video or animation, which I certainly have the technology to enact—and the comment about technology affecting artistic choices is valid, and so is the comment that it shouldn't all be about the technology—is that there's a certain point at which art becomes entertainment, and loses its force.<BR/><BR/>Art is interactive. Entertainment is passive. Art pulls you in, at its best, into its own world, and the experience is engaged and immersive. Entertainment never disturbs your world the way art can, it's far more floating than falling. Rob Brezsny, an artist/activist/writer/astrologer has put it this way, and I completely agree: "Creativity is life. Entertainment is death." The biggest problem with TV is that it's not a very interactive medium; you're expected to sit back and be passively entertained. (What this does to the mindset and expectations of generations of viewers is another discussion.) There are whole regions of the Internet whose paradigm is basically that of TV, passive entertainment. The good news is that there are whole regions of the Internet that are NOT like that, too.<BR/><BR/>So, I could make a video of a poem, using images and music. In fact, I have done so. But what I like about hypertext is that the choices of what links to follow, including none of the above, is up to the reader. There is a participatory aspect to this kind of presentation. Each reader of that poem will experience the poem differently, hopefully, in the choices they make on what "extras" to engage with. Each reader will partially create that experience, based on which links they activate, and which they'll ignore. It requires the reader to be engaged and to make choices, and to participate—and that's one reason I've taken a lot of crap for this attempt at multi-media poetry. If you can imagine, many people are actually MORE accepting of passively-watched video versions than versions in which they have to make choices and interact. (We'll just mention again that discussion for another time about generations of TV viewers being influenced by TV in how they respond to the universe.) <BR/><BR/>The most laughable reply I got to that multi-media poem when I first presented it was, "You're making me work too hard!" There is something profoundly funny and disturbing about a response like that to poetry—although it might explain a few things about what's wrong with the contemporary poetry scene in general.<BR/><BR/>A lot of Flash-animated VisPo is similarly passive for the viewer. One reason I have some difficulty with some of what I've seen with online VisPo is that it operates on the same paradigm as TV: "I am presenting you with my thoughts, and you'd better damn well receive them." Even painting is more interactive than this, because it allows for the time the viewer needs to become absorbed in the piece. A gallery display of VisPo might therefore be more engaging than these little anime mini-videos being presented online. <BR/><BR/>Online is often still too much like TV: people give you "content" (artists have become "content providers") that you're still expected to sit back and passively watch. One advantage of the Web, though, is the ability to clock away. That's a wee bit of non-passivity, even if at times it's not much more control over the medium than using the TV's remote control to click away. Another advantage of the Web is that everyone who does have access to that aforementioned technology is capable, time and talent permitting, of creating dialogue by making art, either de natura or in counterpoint and response to other artists. The possibility for artistic dialogue is greater than ever before, with like-minded artists who live all over the planet. (Look at what we're doing here!) <BR/><BR/>So, the possibility of making art/poetry/music less passive and more interactive is inherently supported by the technology. And that's why I presented that poem that way, rather than some other way.Art Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-67239710286857014882008-08-12T15:48:00.000+01:002008-08-12T15:48:00.000+01:00Adrian, I agree with you. I think that's the probl...<B>Adrian</B>, I agree with you. I think that's the problem with anything new, we get all caught up with the medium and the content falls behind. It'll catch up. What I did find in my trawl through the Internet was that I couldn't always play the piece without downloading something new. I think once formats have settled down a bit too this will help no end, it won't be such a kerfuffle getting into the thing.<BR/><BR/>That's the problem I'm having at the moment with your piece, <B>Art</B>, finding a space to get into it. It's not like a poem where I can slink off into a corner with my book and read a bit. It's almost like I'm going to have to make an appointment to engage with it. At least that's how it feels. And maybe that's a good thing, because when I go out of the house to watch a film or whatever I'm prepared for it and committed to devote <I>x</I> amount of time to it. I'll get back to you.<BR/><BR>Jim Murdochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-55394879427247331312008-08-11T20:44:00.000+01:002008-08-11T20:44:00.000+01:00Let's hope it's not *all* about the technology. Th...Let's hope it's not *all* about the technology. That strikes me as a bit empty.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-21897291114983440632008-08-11T18:47:00.000+01:002008-08-11T18:47:00.000+01:00One next step is to take the poem into multimedia,...One next step is to take the poem into multimedia, one style of which I have attempted <A HREF="http://artdurkee.blogspot.com/2008/01/winter-midwinter-midlife-life.html" REL="nofollow">here.</A><BR/><BR/>The usual criticism of these sorts of experiments—which most often seem to come from more traditionalist, "purist" poets—is that, the poem should be able to stand on its own two feet, and need no enhancement. Well, if you're a purist that believes that poetry is and can only be a language-based artform made up only of words, then the argument has some merit. And I don't disagree with it in principle. When I critique a poem, one criteria that comes up is that a poem ought to be able to stand on its own, and note need footnotes or explanations; it needs to be its own entity, and many of the greatest poems create and contain a complete universe of experience in which the reader is immersed.<BR/><BR/>But the problem with this criticism is that the critics tend to stop at dismissal, and do not take up the pursuit of "okay, then, what else?" The enhancement of poetry via illumination, as in haiga and the other forms you're discussing here, is NOT the same thing as providing footnotes or explanations. So, the criticism is a bit apples-and-oranges.<BR/><BR/>Another direction to take is the performance direction, in which the words come alive as spoken word. Now, don't get me wrong: I think most of what goes on at Slams, and poetry readings, and the whole "spoken word" movement, which is all-too-dominated by hip-hop-style aspirations and egoism, is crap. Rather, performance art has some very poetic and poetry-based aspects that have shown the best of what can be done with "enhanced poetry" (if you will). One need only think of Laurie Anderson at her best. But another very effective type of solution is Kenneth Gaburo's "metalanguage," which is the basis of pieces such as "Maledetto," which is still one of hte more amazing pieces out there along these lines. Far too few poets have pursued this direction for their possible work. "Maledetto" can be heard on the wonderful UbuWeb site at:<BR/><BR/>http://www.ubu.com/sound/gaburo.htmlArt Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-12374030636565193672008-08-11T11:28:00.000+01:002008-08-11T11:28:00.000+01:00That's nice of you Susan. If you've developed an i...That's nice of you <B>Susan</B>. If you've developed an interest in spoken poetry then you might like my post <A HREF="http://jim-murdoch.blogspot.com/2008/03/art-and-science-of-reading-poetry-out.html" REL="nofollow">The art and science of reading poetry out loud (with Stephen Hawking)</A>.<BR/><BR>Jim Murdochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-24319961741330865522008-08-11T01:01:00.000+01:002008-08-11T01:01:00.000+01:00LOLYou caught me doing just that!I've also jotted ...LOL<BR/>You caught me doing just that!<BR/><BR/>I've also jotted down your blog address to pass to a friend tomorrow, who introduced me to poetry as performance art (Slam, etc). That was new to me too.<BR/><BR/>Very grateful for friends who pull me out of my Poe-and-Wordsworth re-readings for a look 'round once in a while!Susan at Stony Riverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10385202649291774852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-84662533432440560352008-08-11T00:52:00.000+01:002008-08-11T00:52:00.000+01:00Thank you for the kind words, Susan, and for the s...Thank you for the kind words, <B>Susan</B>, and for the speedy feedback - I've only just finished tweaking the thing. I hope you check out parts <A HREF="http://jim-murdoch.blogspot.com/2008/08/poetry-and-art-part-one.html" REL="nofollow">one</A> and <A HREF="http://jim-murdoch.blogspot.com/2008/08/poetry-and-art-part-two.html" REL="nofollow">two</A> as well.Jim Murdochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12786388638146471193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6327348657265652781.post-21324563818493229462008-08-11T00:34:00.000+01:002008-08-11T00:34:00.000+01:00I love this post; I've been illustrating my own jo...I love this post; I've been illustrating my own journal scribblings for years but never thought of taking them further. Thanks! I'm newly inspired. The links you included are helpful too.<BR/><BR/>Congratulations also on your recent novel! After the Sharp Words review I'll be looking out for it.<BR/><BR/>Glad to find you--Susan at Stony Riverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10385202649291774852noreply@blogger.com