Is poetry dead?

[curious1980]

When I ask if poetry is dead...I'm asking if a person can still become successful by writing poetry. The last successful person I heard of, who wrote poetry, was Maya Angelou. Now maybe this is because I'm not that into poetry (I write but I don't read it) or have friends who are...but it just seems to me that poetry is no longer a thing that a person can live off of. Is that really how it is or am I just not realizing other factors?

[caseyquinn]

Depends on your definition of succesful. Do you mean rich and become a full time poet? Then i would say there have been very few in the history of poetry that has been succesful. If you mean a person whose poems are read long after they are dead. I would say that it is alive and well.

[Ken]

... pardon the observation, but if you "don't read poetry" how can you prognose its well-being?

[Pat~]

Just my take, but poetry is only 'dead' in the eyes of contemporary book publishers and book agents. At least this is what several of them have told me. I even had the head of a prominent publishing house read my entire poetry devotional, (half the poems already singly published), and tell me he loved it--but he couldn't go with it because "poetry doesn't sell" and because books of that type almost always need color photography--which adds to the cost/risk for any publisher. Because of that, if you ask me if you can make a living on it, I'd say not likely, unless (maybe) you're a poet laureate.

Doesn't mean it's not a worthwhile pursuit, though. Just don't quit your day job.

[AnonymousWriter]

Now maybe this is because I'm not that into poetry (I write but I don't read it)
uh...what? That's like saying you write novels but never read any...

[poetinahat]

"I'm not a poet, but I play one on TV..."

If you don't even read it yourself, how would you know what makes other people want to buy it? Moreover, if you don't read it yourself, why do you write it?

I'm baffled.

[Perks]

We kill a lot of poetry around here, don't we?

The dead stuff is dead, but the rest is still at least twitching.

People who bend poetically most likely always will. I don't think they can breed it out of us.

[Blackest_Nite]

Poetry is only dead if people allow it to be. And apparently it is alive and well, judging by the previous responses. The question of popularity is a whole other matter. Then again, why should we ever do or not do something based on what is in 'style' or majority? Poetry has it's own audience just as sci-fi, fantasy, and non-fiction have theirs.

[C.bronco]

I don't think poets could ever live off of writing poetry, bu it sure isn't dead!
:)

[KTC]

the original post angers me too much to give a shit about answering. i do feel better for having stated why i refuse to answer though. but just a tad better. damn.

[curious1980]

Tons of questions directed to me and not enough opinions towards the topic. Why do I need to clarify myself in order for someone to state whether or not they think poetry is dead? I didn't post the question to baffle anyone or upset anyone. Just wanted to get people's take on the topic.

I have heard a lot of people stating (and I some what believe) poetry is dead or at least dying. Not that it's not being written because people write everyday (yes even a non-reader like myself). It's just that people don't talk about poetry anymore...people don't boast poetry anymore...and I don't know to many that read poetry. Honestly, outside of your circle of friends who write...who do you know reads poetry? I can't think of anyone. That's the reason why it seems to be on a downward slope.

[Dichroic]

If poetry is dead, there are a hell of a lot of necrophiliacs out there - tens or hundreds on this site, hundreds or thousands of other poetry sites on the web. No one is forced to read all of those.

[Izz]

Tons of questions directed to me and not enough opinions towards the topic. Why do I need to clarify myself in order for someone to state whether or not they think poetry is dead?Because very often the people who waltz in and post these types of questions never read poetry and are basing their assumptions on thin air. And often those people are being intentionally antagonistic.

Your post states you don't read poetry or know anybody who does. So therefore you make a statement that poetry must be dead. Right, and I don't play soccer, or know anybody who does, so obviously the sport of soccer is dead and buried.

Plus, your post is all based around what you define as a successful poet, which appears to be making a living from writing poetry. And then you mention Maya Angelou as an example of a successful poet, as in, someone who has made her living from her poetry. Maya Angelou, famous because of her amazing autobiographical work, so who can't actually be said to have made a living from her poetry, and who, to my knowledge, has never claimed to have made a living from her poetry. I'm not denying she's a good poet and worthy of the Pulitzer she won; what i am pointing out is the flaw in your perceived argument.

So if you march in and make a blanket statement about 1) what you perceive successful to be and 2) what you perceive a successful poet to be, without actually making any proper, logical case for those statements, then yeah, people might start directing questions back to you. And rightly so.

[Dichroic]

Making a living from poetry is probably not the best criteria of success or greatness, anyway. Robert Frost was a farmer, William Carlos Williams was a doctor, and Wallace Stevens was an insurance agent.

[Priene]

Is poetry dead?

I hope not.

[poetinahat]

I could have saved some time by just pointing back to Isaac's post, but here's my version.
Tons of questions directed to me and not enough opinions towards the topic. Why do I need to clarify myself in order for someone to state whether or not they think poetry is dead? I didn't post the question to baffle anyone or upset anyone. Just wanted to get people's take on the topic.

That might be an indication that your question wasn't clear. Don't blame the people who took the time to read and respond. Let's say fifteen people read your question. If fourteen of them thought it wasn't clear, where is the problem likely to be: the way they read it, or the way you wrote it?

And you *did* get people's take on the topic. Read all the posts. You got plenty of serious and thoughtful responses - more than you could possibly have expected, especially given that you don't even read the stuff yourself. If you bothered to read poetry, you might be farther along on the answer. And you really can't expect people to spend much time on answering your question if you don't care enough to read poetry on your own; don't you think you've answered your own question anyway?

There is at least one excellent thread in here on this subject. Have a read through this thread (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14413) and see if you still want to discuss. (For future reference, the Search tool here can be pretty helpful - third from the right on the menu bar above.)

[Norman D Gutter]

Poetry is not dead, but it is certainly in decline in terms of its influence in the world at large and even in the world of literature. The reasons for this are probably complex, having to do with fundamental changes in the nature of mankind as well as the normal ebb and flow between different forms of literature. Whether this decline is leading to death (with death defined in terms of influence, not in terms of prosperity) or whether poetry will snap out of it is a question that will be determined over the next century. Both influence and prosperity are related to sales and usage. Sales are down, I believe. Usage too is down, despite the many open mics and slams.

I'm not optimistic.

Best regards,
NDG

[TooJoyful00]

I truly understand your question and I can honestly appreciate your take on this topic. However I would like to give my feedback.
Poetry will never die because it's the soul of a writer.
As long as there's an idea, a paper, pen or a computer....poetry will always be around.

I will keep you posted once my book is published. I am surely looking forward to putting some life back into Poerty:)

Be blessed.




Tons of questions directed to me and not enough opinions towards the topic. Why do I need to clarify myself in order for someone to state whether or not they think poetry is dead? I didn't post the question to baffle anyone or upset anyone. Just wanted to get people's take on the topic.

I have heard a lot of people stating (and I some what believe) poetry is dead or at least dying. Not that it's not being written because people write everyday (yes even a non-reader like myself). It's just that people don't talk about poetry anymore...people don't boast poetry anymore...and I don't know to many that read poetry. Honestly, outside of your circle of friends who write...who do you know reads poetry? I can't think of anyone. That's the reason why it seems to be on a downward slope.

[Doomie]

[B]To Curious1980: [B]

I read your initial post, and read most of the reply posts; then viewed your profile page, and other threads and posts that are listed on your personal page. IMHO, I don't believe you meant any harm; you're just inquisitive. That's not a bad thing, but can certainly be misunderstood when motive and context come into play. Hey, Poets are like anyone else, in that they will protect the significance of their craft; are you really surprised that other members aggressively questioned your question? You're a screenplay and stageplay writer, correct? If a nonfiction book author posted a thread in one of those forums, and asked why people bother to write such things - while admitting that they neither write nor watch either - would you not wonder [aloud] why that person would care?

Now, about your question: The spoken word will never die. It will rise and fall, just like horror, sci-fi, and yes - stage plays. With so many people working, or wanting to work, in this day and age, why do producers continue to pour money into daytime soaps? Because there are people who still love it. I guess I've taken the scenic route to state that we all come under the umbrella of creative writing. And believe it or not, there are people out there that will find whatever it is that you do just as pointless. Try to be as encouraging and supportive of Poets as you would want them to be of you.

If anything, since you're a screenplay/stageplay writer, why not request the assistance of a Poet to create a character? Perhaps a script about a poet who is determined to make it as a poet? I mean, your characters do have occupations and/or passions, right? Right?? Riiiiiight???

[lorianne]

i think your question is more: is poetry dead to the masses who consume?

the answer would of course be yes. but they're the same people who buy $12 cups of coffee, watch reality TV and buy glossy magazines, not books...any books.

so really... does it matter if poetry is dead to them?

[scottVee]

Like anything else, it's a sliding window. To someone who loves poetry, poetry is not dead. Cast a wider net ... take 10 people in the neighborhood, most of them probably couldn't care less. Take a town of 100,000, surely the poetry crowd is a mere 1% or so. You can keep playing with the context to get any answer you want.

Take a coffehouse on an open mic night -- poetry's doing fine. Poetry gets entagled with music, and music isn't going away.

Regarding "success", again you can choose your definition to get any answer you want. Number of poets getting published = plenty. Number of poets that are satisfied, having found some small audience = quite a few. (Though one might intersect this with the set of poets/artists who can't be satisfied by anything.) Number of poets making $1000 a month with poetry alone = not so many, but it's not zero.

Questions like "is X dead" or "is X worthwhile" are both dead and not worthwhile. ;-)

[Gray Rose]

This question/sentiment from new posters appears here so often, I think it's time for a FAQ thread entitled "IS POETRY DEAD? Click here before posting."

[Izz]

This question/sentiment from new posters appears here so often, I think it's time for a FAQ thread entitled "IS POETRY DEAD? Click here before posting."Yeah, with a one-word answer beneath the question:


"NO."

[C.bronco]

All of the great, pulitzer winnig poets in the US also teach at universities. Being successful, however, as in affecting a lot of people and leaving a mark on this world is another thing.

[Gray Rose]

Yeah, with a one-word answer beneath the question:


"NO."

With links to previous threads, and a polite* entreaty not to post any new ones.

* optionally, impolite

[Feiss]

I think poetry faked his own death with an induced cardiac arrest and will have a "back from the dead tour" by the year 2023.

[Dichroic]

All of the great, pulitzer winnig poets in the US also teach at universities. Being successful, however, as in affecting a lot of people and leaving a mark on this world is another thing.

Assuming those poets don't suck as teachers, I can't think of a better way to "affect a lot of people and leaving a mark on this world".

[KTC]

I think poetry faked his own death with an induced cardiac arrest and will have a "back from the dead tour" by the year 2023.

2012, dumbass. It's in the bag...and it ain't in drag. Kitsch, by god...and melamine and cockle shells and pretty maids. All in a row. A fight, that is. A fit. 2012...I'm backstage all ready, sweet patootie. Hookah pipe in hand. Hello God, answer the phone. We'll have tea at 5. If you're still alive.

[brokenfingers]

Poetry isn't about being successful. It's about touching hearts.

[KTC]

Poetry isn't about being successful. It's about touching hearts.

wiggly ones still beating
in cavities filled with loads of blood.

[Dichroic]

I think poetry faked his own death with an induced cardiac arrest and will have a "back from the dead tour" by the year 2023.

Wait, poetry is Michael Jackson?

(Though Amanda Palmer's cover of Billy Jean (Youtube it) convinced me that maybe he could *write* poetry.)

[Feiss]

pretty much

[firstmidnight]

I don't think poetry is dead, but being reincarnated. Broadway is going through the same slump right now. During a recession and post-war, the arts become more... superficial (at least from what I know in theater and film). People need to be cheered up. They don't want to read things with depth or see things with depth. Right now, the only things selling in theater are those tacky movie-musicals. And films? It's not a hit unless Katherine Heigl is in it (and lord, what an actress?). It's harder for poetry though.

Think about it. When people go to lower school, middle school, high school, etc... think about it. What is their first impression of poetry? Robert Frost. Walt Whitman. Emily Dickinson. I'm not saying their poetry sucks by any means. They hallmarked things. There's merit in what they wrote. However, to a 13 - 16 year old hormonal teenager? Of course, that poetry is going to be dry and boring and it's going to leave a very bad aftertaste in their mouth.

That's why consumers don't bother with poetry. Their first impressions are slow to them and it lingers the older they get. If you got high schoolers to read Bob Hicok, Edward Fields, Gwen Brooks, Billy Collins, Allen Ginsberg, Elizabeth Bishop (the list is ENDLESS), I think you'd see a horse of a different color.

[TooJoyful00]

[b]To Curious1980: [b]

I read your initial post, and read most of the reply posts; then viewed your profile page, and other threads and posts that are listed on your personal page. IMHO, I don't believe you meant any harm; you're just inquisitive. That's not a bad thing, but can certainly be misunderstood when motive and context come into play. Hey, Poets are like anyone else, in that they will protect the significance of their craft; are you really surprised that other members aggressively questioned your question? You're a screenplay and stageplay writer, correct? If a nonfiction book author posted a thread in one of those forums, and asked why people bother to write such things - while admitting that they neither write nor watch either - would you not wonder [aloud] why that person would care?

Now, about your question: The spoken word will never die. It will rise and fall, just like horror, sci-fi, and yes - stage plays. With so many people working, or wanting to work, in this day and age, why do producers continue to pour money into daytime soaps? Because there are people who still love it. I guess I've taken the scenic route to state that we all come under the umbrella of creative writing. And believe it or not, there are people out there that will find whatever it is that you do just as pointless. Try to be as encouraging and supportive of Poets as you would want them to be of you.

If anything, since you're a screenplay/stageplay writer, why not request the assistance of a Poet to create a character? Perhaps a script about a poet who is determined to make it as a poet? I mean, your characters do have occupations and/or passions, right? Right?? Riiiiiight???



Well said without stepping on any toes.

[groovyville]

I know this is going to sound crazy, but in a way, I believe that poetry has always been dead.- lol
Now before you kill me, let me explain:
a) most people cannot make a living off their poetry
b) many people I've met don't see the point in poetry (sadly)
c) most famous poets are dead
d) people don't appreciate it as much as they used to
e) most people I know don't write poetry either
f) it's very hard to find someone who will publish your poetry who is not a self publisher and/or scam AND who will give you royalties from it

So yes poetry has it's place among us along with other things, but in a way it is sadly very dead. (we should probably hold a funeral one of these days-lol)

(please do not attack me for my post, I am a poetry fanatic who has written over 100 poems in the past 2 years, loves Robert Frost and Shakespeare, and has a google group all about poetry; I'm just pointing out the sad reality)

[KTC]

It's not a reality, though. Who says it has to financially support you for it to be alive. It's a vital pulse in the universe.


I know this is going to sound crazy, but in a way, I believe that poetry has always been dead.- lol
Now before you kill me, let me explain:
a) most people cannot make a living off their poetry
WHO CARES

b) many people I've met don't see the point in poetry (sadly)
WHO CARES. SAD FOR THEM

c) most famous poets are dead
REALLY?

d) people don't appreciate it as much as they used to
REALLY?


e) most people I know don't write poetry either
WHO CARES


f) it's very hard to find someone who will publish your poetry who is not a self publisher and/or scam AND who will give you royalties from it

UM. WHY WOULD THEY PUBLISH IT FOR FREE WITHOUT HOPING TO GET ROYALTIES FROM SELLING IT TO THE PUBLIC. THERE ARE COUNTLESS LEGITIMATE POETRY PUBLICATIONS OUT THERE THAT WILL PAY YOU FOR YOUR WORK...AND YET HOPE TO MAKE MONEY FROM IT.


So yes poetry has it's place among us along with other things, but in a way it is sadly very dead. (we should probably hold a funeral one of these days-lol)

(please do not attack me for my post, I am a poetry fanatic who has written over 100 poems in the past 2 years, loves Robert Frost and Shakespeare, and has a google group all about poetry; I'm just pointing out the sad reality)


Poetry is not dead. If it were dead, it wouldn't be a form. Poetry is not dead.

People have to stop thinking of poetry as a career.


Not attacking...just disagreeing vehemently.

[groovyville]

quotes from KTC (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3833137&postcount=36)
"d) people don't appreciate it as much as they used to
REALLY?"
Um.... yeah, Have you been in a high school English class lately?
All the kids think it's rubbish and a waste of time and don't even like it.
(we had a huge debate in my senior english class where it was me for poetry and the rest of the class against poetry)

"e) most people I know don't write poetry either
WHO CARES"
Well developing film is a dying/mostly dead art, and nobody cares about that, but it doesn't change the fact that it's DYING/DEAD


"f) it's very hard to find someone who will publish your poetry who is not a self publisher and/or scam AND who will give you royalties from it

UM. WHY WOULD THEY PUBLISH IT FOR FREE WITHOUT HOPING TO GET ROYALTIES FROM SELLING IT TO THE PUBLIC. THERE ARE COUNTLESS LEGITIMATE POETRY PUBLICATIONS OUT THERE THAT WILL PAY YOU FOR YOUR WORK...AND YET HOPE TO MAKE MONEY FROM IT."
well then please send me some links to some of them cause I'm exhausted from searching for them.


"Poetry is not dead. If it were dead, it wouldn't be a form. Poetry is not dead. "
Scratchboard is a dead form of art, it's still dead even though it's a form.

"People have to stop thinking of poetry as a career. "
well most people who love to write poetry want it to be their career

Not attacking...just defending

[Izz]

UM. WHY WOULD THEY PUBLISH IT FOR FREE WITHOUT HOPING TO GET ROYALTIES FROM SELLING IT TO THE PUBLIC. THERE ARE COUNTLESS LEGITIMATE POETRY PUBLICATIONS OUT THERE THAT WILL PAY YOU FOR YOUR WORK...AND YET HOPE TO MAKE MONEY FROM IT."[/I]
well then please send me some links to some of them cause I'm exhausted from searching for them.http://www.duotrope.com. Search under poetry. More markets than you can shake a stick at.

well most people who love to write poetry want it to be their careerI will respectfully disagree with this. Most people i know who love to write poetry write it because they love it, not because they want it to be their career.

[groovyville]

thanks for the link, gonna check it out right now

And I never said they write it only because they want it to be a career, what I meant was that poets wish they would make a career out of writing poetry because they enjoy it so much (I know i do)

[Gray Rose]

Groovy, welcome to AW.

The fact that people you know don't care about poetry is, how to say this mildly, completely unrelated to poetry's vitality. As a couterexample, most people I know care deeply about poetry, many publish poetry in paying markets, and some are "professional" poets. I have a good friend who is a creative writing/poetry professor and a poet, and another very close friend is a famous poet and a professor of comparative literature, newly appointed to a chair previously occupied by another, very famous poet.

Perhaps in your peer group poetry is dead, which doesn't mean anything, as I said before. Perhaps you need to expand your horizons a little?

Next, nobody makes their living writing poetry, no matter how famous you are. Poets have other jobs. Many are professors. In the past, poetry was often, but not always, written by people who had independent means.

If you want to make your living out of your poetry, you will sadly be very disappointed; this has nothing to do with poetry being dead or alive, but rather with unrealistic expectations. That said, it is very possible to earn money selling your poetry. It's not a lot of money, but it is definitely payment.

Check out Duotrope, as Iz already suggested. I will run out of poems to submit before I run out of places to submit them to. As for presses, etc - don't expect amazing royalties, but if you publish and gain a name for yourself, a poetry collection is not impossible. The Curiosities imprint of the independent Norilana press recently published three collections of speculative poets Mike Allen, Catherynne Valente and JoSelle Vanderhooft. Eventually I hope to have similar success. If you write mainstream, you have much more options.

Good luck with your writing!
Rose

[KTC]

Might I add...the fact that you love poetry should speak volumes to its heartbeat. It's alive, bud. You will find people who love it. In all cities there are circle of poetry enthusiasts. Sometimes you have to look for them, but they're there. As Gray Rose said...so say I...I have dozens of friends who love poetry very deeply. I go to readings and slams regularly. If there is nothing in your community...start something up. It's like baseball...if you build it, they will come.

[groovyville]

Might I add...the fact that you love poetry should speak volumes to its heartbeat. It's alive, bud. You will find people who love it. In all cities there are circle of poetry enthusiasts. Sometimes you have to look for them, but they're there. As Gray Rose said...so say I...I have dozens of friends who love poetry very deeply. I go to readings and slams regularly. If there is nothing in your community...start something up. It's like baseball...if you build it, they will come.

touche... you make an excellent point to which I have no response :flag: lol
:)

[Dichroic]

Many people seem to think knitting is a dying art, suitable only for old ladies. You can buy a sweater for much less than you can buy the yarn to knit one, and the realities of the time it takes means you can't sell what you knit (I'd have to charge thousands for a sweater to pay for my time). Yet its resurgence is such that "stitch and bitch" groups have sprung up all over the world (I've belongs to groups in Phoenix AZ, the Netherlands, and Taipei myself), knitting books are proliferating and Ravelry, a relatively new social networking site for knitters, is still in beta yet has just under four hundred thousand members.

An art does not have to be either popular in the mainstream or commercially viable to be vibrantly alive.

[Ken]

... poetry is a powerful medium of expression and those who shy away from it are suffering a great loss, similar to if their tongues and ears had been cut off.

[groovyville]

... poetry is a powerful medium of expression and those who shy away from it are suffering a great loss, similar to if their tongues and ears had been cut off.

I agree!

[B.D. Eyeslie]

While the jury's still out on the fate of poetry, I would like to remind everyone that Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead.

[Blarg]

To the vast majority of people, yes.

A more interesting question is whether it is growing or dying, or whether that does or should matter.

[kborsden]

Poetry is only dead in the eyes of those that don't/can't understand the nature of what modern poetry is. While it is true that the industry has changed, the change is not negative -- it has splintered -- diversified and specified itself to individual audiences. If anything, poetry has had a great resurgence and is available to a far wider audience than ever before, with people of all walks of life and from all backgrounds participating by writing, publishing (not necessarily self-publishing either, there are many, many popular indie magazines, ezines set up by everyday folk and outlets, not to mention ecommerce and the free ebook markets) and there are still events to consider. Last week I attended an event organized by a charity to raise awareness for mental illness - many of the sspeakers were sufferers of violent crimes and psychological disorders - others were nurses and support workers, family members and just people who had something to say, and about 70% of those weren't solicited, oh no, they had found out about the event and simply showed up with something to read.

Another thing to take note of is the youth - we have rap/hip-hop, modern lyricism, spoken word -- and a new phenomenon called fizz (spoken word accompanied with beat and bass). These are influences that can lead to exploration of poetry - and with many artists involved with them admiting to being fans of poetry, I see no reason why not.

Poetry in the classical sense of a literary art is very much alive - but it has returned to the people.

Only someone unfamiliar with the modern reader/audience/liefhebber/affectionado would see the more grounded nature, the original life of poetry in resurgence as its death, and I'd say to any such stranger, whether poet or not, that they should actually explore it and not just regurgitate unsubstantiated nonsense.

[Roses Are Red]

There's this song. And it goes something like "I'm sick of poets working part time jobs while pissy people pick and choose the stars" and, most unfortunately, I agree. Not completely. It is hard to make a living off being a poet, or so I've heard because like you I don't really read poetry, but it's definitely possible. I think.

[Blarg]

Only as a songwriter. Think Rod McKuen. Horrific poetry. Gold records. Massive dollars. You'd never admit you wrote it.

[kborsden]

It is hard to make a living off being a poet, or so I've heard because like you I don't really read poetry, but it's definitely possible. I think.

::face palm::

There's this song. And it goes something like "I'm sick of poets working part time jobs while pissy people pick and choose the stars" and, most unfortunately, I agree.

A poetry version of the X-Factor (or Idols) would cheapen it beyond repair, as it has done for music -- favouring the bland corporate, commercial and populist trends above the crux and core of creativity and expression...

Only as a songwriter. Think Rod McKuen. Horrific poetry. Gold records. Massive dollars. You'd never admit you wrote it.

I agree and don't. As far as successful contemporary poets go, check out these guys (http://famouspoetsandpoems.com/poets_contemporary.html). Also, my personal friends, the widely published and multiple award-winning, world-renowned (and recently the first British poet to be named a celebrity poet), Jim Bennett (http://www.poetrykit.org/jim/index.htm) and incredibly successful Stephen Knight (http://literature.britishcouncil.org/stephen-knight).

It brings me back to my earlier face palm -- if you don't read poetry, or if you're not interested enough in poetry to read or at least explore the current market for reading material, you can't really say with any amount of weight what success can be gained through being a poet today. It's foolish even to say that the few I link to here are exceptions to the rule that there is no viability in a successful literary career in poetry -- they're just exceptions to the fact that the market is swamped with bad sub-par poetry. That's not to say they are any better than anyone else in particular, just that their poetry is of an observably marketable nature without being rubbish. Which brings me to here. (http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=212806)

[Ken]

... good point by Kborsden. Before anyone can make a verdict, one way or the other, one really has to be thoroughly immersed in the current poetry scene and be up on all the mentioned venues. Otherwise it's sorta like saying that redwood trees are dead because you haven't seen any in Oklahoma and Wyoming, without ever stepping foot in California.

To make verdicts one needs to be versed.

[JRH]

Dana Gaoia was among the 1st to declare Poetry to be dead and he was focusing on the effects of MFA programs on the quality of poetry magazines relative to the decline of Formalist Poetry as compared to the prevelance of free verse.

I would assert instead that impulse to write poetry is stronger than ever but the overall quality of the Verse , at least that presented in major magazines, has marketly declined and that such can be attributed to the current bias against Rhyme and Meter practiced by such markets which has made it extremely difficult for a classical Poet such as myself to get published even though I approach dozens if not hundreds of markets every year and have only about 25 sales to show in over 50 years of submissions even though I consider most of my poems superior to those that are being published and I think that the poems I've posted on these forums, under JRH, justify that opinion.

James R. Hoye (JRH)

[kborsden]

Dana Gaoia was among the 1st to declare Poetry to be dead and he was focusing on the effects of MFA programs on the quality of poetry magazines relative to the decline of Formalist Poetry as compared to the prevelance of free verse.

And yet free verse is possibly the most ancient form of poetry (http://uweb.superlink.net/~neptune/FreeVers.html) known, strange how the supposed decline of something which is actually newer in favour of something older (more classic, perhaps) can be considered the death of the art-form on the whole... sounds like snobbery to me, ill-informed snobbery.

I would assert instead that impulse to write poetry is stronger than ever but the overall quality of the Verse , at least that presented in major magazines, has marketly declined and that such can be attributed to the current bias against Rhyme and Meter practiced by such markets which has made it extremely difficult for a classical Poet such as myself to get published even though I approach dozens if not hundreds of markets every year and have only about 25 sales to show in over 50 years of submissions

It depends where you look (http://www.ramblingrose.com/poetry/formalpubs.html)

even though I consider most of my poems superior to those that are being published and I think that the poems I've posted on these forums, under JRH, justify that opinion.

Ego-trip much? This is incredibly arrogant and condescending -- unbelievably insulting to any poet here who has published their lesser poetry in comparison to yours. There are a few poets on these forums (such as myself) that have enjoyed a decent amount of success with their poetry -- primarily free verse in my case. I'm glad though that I can still be in awe of your superior pieces(!) We are blessed to have such a poetry God as yourself in our midst to outshine our every effort. Thank you.

OR...

Maybe you're just not as good as you believe you are? Or others just don't like your poetry as much as you do? Could it be? I've had several formal pieces published too -- shock-horror-shock-shock, GASP!!!

On one level I can see past my initial annoyance at what appears to be complete disregard for the time, effort and ability of your peers as I don't believe publishing credits are an accurate measuring stick for ability for many reasons -- there are poets of a very high caliber that do not seek publication and there are many, many populist and fashionable ideals that meet almost immediate publication, and then there are also the unfashionable and supposedly outdated trends... and there will always be a market somewhere. If you want to publish your poetry, look for a market, there are plenty to choose from. On another level I find myself grated by your post -- it reads almost like sour grapes, and as I mentioned earlier, carries a distinct stench of snobbery based on an opinion that poetry other than what you write isn't and does not qualify as real poetry, irregardless of the processes, energies and efforts of the poets who compose them.

[Diana_Rajchel]

I don't think poetry is dead. I think it's relocated. If you set aside the viability of poetry as a market, it's very much alive.

*Poetry slams are happening in major cities across the United States.
*Spoken word events are a trend, at least where I'm located. Much of the spoken word does revolve around poetry, rhyming and free.
*Super niche markets, especially religious/spiritual of all types, still tends to have space for poetry because it fulfills a certain liturgical need.
*Podcasting is more common; science fiction/spec writers have been purveying some of their stories this way for a few years, and it makes sense to distribute poetry this way too.

I also think that poetry is one of the only places where self-publishing has virtually no stigma. I see chapbooks and zines by individual poets on a regular basis, and the handmade aspect doesn't put me off, nor does it seem to put off anyone else I know who likes reading poetry.

[JRH]

Super responce Kie, My bet is that you've never read any of my Poetry, and by your choice, never will.

I've been studying and writing poetry for over for over 50 years and , at age 69, I've earned my arrogance through the quality of what I write. Sorry if that offends you. Here's a selection from my Chapbook, "A Mixed Bag", A Collection of Haiku, Senryu and Aphorisms.

"Daybreak"

first ray of sunlight
floods the shadowed world
with vibrant colors

Copyright (c) 28 Jun 2008 James R. Hoye

********
scattered birdcalls
mark the end of night
and start of day

Copyright (c) 28 Jun 2008 James R. Hoye

on his lily pad
a sleepy frog wakes with the sun
and croaks good morning

Copyright © 28 Jun 2008 James R. Hoye

when the sun rises,
light pushes out the darkness.
a lone crane preens.

with sun in the east,
a new day's beginning.
time to go fishing.

Copyright © 9 Mar 2009 James R. Hoye

"Nature's Music"

listen to the swamp.
crickets chirping, frogs croaking,
sweet cachophony.

Copyright 9 Mar 2009 James R. Hoye
________

tumbling from its nest
a young bird fullfills its heritage
by spreading its wings

Copyright © 26 May 2009 James R. Hoye

And here's a set containing both Haiku and Senryu which is destined to be the basis for my next book.

"Summer Diet"

blazing sun turns grasses brown
Locus arn't complaining
They like fried food

"Smaller Rainbows"

fallen sunbeams
trapped in a waterfall's spray
create shifting rainbows
________

falling sunbeams
a waterfall's spray
shifting rainbows

The Cornered Cat

frightened cat
treed
mocks the dogs below

"A Simple Truth"

man who tries to keep
two women on a string
may find he loses both

"A Senryu"

writers of Haiku
may sometimes miss the mark
but gain by trying

"Stocking Up"

A small squirrel darts forth
making a harried dash
for one last nut

Copyright (c) 18 Dec 2009 James R. Hoye

"Going Shopping"

mouse moves stealthily
across the kitchen floor
lured by scent of cheese

Copyright (c) 18 Dec 2009 James R. Hoye

******

a Japanese calligrapher in his 70s had high praise for the volume including that he felt I was the only Poet writing in English who had ever "gotten" Japanese Haiku
and that, at the very least, he intended to transcribe a number of my Haiku into Japanese and was considering putting out a Japanese/English version of my Chapbook, (Although it will probably be a while before that could come to fruition).

Additionally, a number of people who I respect highly have had much praise for the volume, including an English Professor at the University of Puget Sound, so I believe, at the very least, that I am on the right track in trying to carry on the classic Haiku traditions, despite the problems involved in trying to emulate the original Japanese Masters.

In any case, I hope you enjoy these excerpts

Jim Hoye

JRH

[Norman D Gutter]

The "poetry is dead" debate is a bit meaningless without a definition of terms and conditions.

Without a doubt more poetry is being written now than ever before—but we also have a larger population than ever before. Is the proportion of new poetry to new prose the same as it was 200 years ago? Who knows? And how could you know?

A lot of the poetry being written now is garbage. Undoubtedly a lot of the poetry being written 200 years ago was garbage, but no one is paying to keep reproducing it for succeeding generations, so we don't know about it. A lot of what's being produced today won't be around for future generations. So that seems about the same.

I have not studied it as much as I want, but I believe poetry originally (meaning the Greeks or Chinese or Hebrews, or maybe all three) was metrical but not rhyming. It was written to aid in memorization and recitation. Rhyming came in later. Milton said that rhyme was a modern convention, and by that I believe he meant Chaucer, 250 years before him, and probably Dante. Schools of poetry come and go.

That rhyme is out of favor at present, and has been for most of a century, may be a temporary trend. The human race apparently changed over the millenia, such that meter without rhyme, once fashionable, became displeasing and we had to have rhyme with our meter. Eventually the poets themselves rebelled against this, but may have left the largest part of their audience behind, still liking a little rhyme with their meter.

It seems to me that the better question than "is poetry dead", and I think what people mean when they ask if poetry is dead, is "Does poetry and do poets still influence the world?" And I think the answer to that is "barely, if at all." What journalist, wanting an opinion about an important issue, seeks out a poet for an interview? How many poets are household names? It may be different in the UK, but on this side of the pond none. Oh, everyone knows of Maya Angelou, but almost no one has a book of her poetry on their shelves. When Americans went west in covered wagons, most families had two books with them: a Bible, and a copy of Paradise Lost. Now, not one in 1000 people have made it all the way through PL.

Having said all of this, I must qualify it to say I am far, far removed from popular culture. I know no rap songs or lyrics. I read little free verse, for I have a difficult time seeing the poetry in it. I don't say it's not poetry, or that it's not good or even better than good poetry, but I say I don't enjoy it so I don't read it much. Maybe the generation after me, or the one after that (I'm 59) is being influenced by poetry. My generation, the Baby Boomers, wasn't. And that's a shame.

[kborsden]

Super responce Kie, My bet is that you've never read any of my Poetry, and by your choice, never will.

I have actually, and found very little formal or classical poetry -- what I did come across was some nicely stylized custom metric verse and concept-formed poetry. The bigger question is why you feel it necessary to say that what you write is better than what anyone else here, save maybe for a few metric poets have written. Have you read anything of mine? Or do you choose not to?

I've been studying and writing poetry for over for over 50 years and , at age 69, I've earned my arrogance through the quality of what I write. Sorry if that offends you. Here's a selection from my Chapbook, "A Mixed Bag", A Collection of Haiku, Senryu and Aphorisms.

The quality of what you write doesn't offend me, your attitude does. I could judge my own poetry as above and beyond that of others, if I wanted to... numerous prizes for free verse, dada-esque, formal and a reasonable publishing history for those same families of poetry; I have been requested for readings, and lectures; and write internationally for 'The Lonely Send Off', an organization that organizes eulogies for fallen heroes and people who die without relatives. If you have earned your arrogance, perhaps I have earned my right to be offended by it?

Additionally, a number of people who I respect highly have had much praise for the volume, including an English Professor at the University of Puget Sound, so I believe, at the very least, that I am on the right track in trying to carry on the classic Haiku traditions, despite the problems involved in trying to emulate the original Japanese Masters.

Did I say anything was wrong with formal or classical poetry? I enjoy it as much, if not more than most free verse -- I also enjoy writing it. My complaint is that I know how saturated the markets are with crap, but that goes equally for prose, indeed any expressive art-form. There shouldn't be an argument that divides free verse and formal - there are examples of pure drivel in both, and examples of genius. The resurgence of free verse in the first quarter of the 20th century may have opened the gates and given rise to any rubbish being passed off under the name, but the truth is, good free verse is just as much of an art as any classical form. The problem is that too many modern poets misunderstand the concept behind it, as do many formal poets, and this in turn taints all/any poet who explores it. I write both, I match concept to form -- as I said, see my poetry and you'd know. My favourite verse forms are Terza Rima and Englyn, most of what I write is based around those as core methodologies, and take any opportunity to promote the latter as it is a dying form that deserves far more appreciation (see the visitor message I sent you a while back). I incorporate as much knowledge and usage of meter into my free verse as in my metric poetry -- why? Because free verse is metrical. The meter is just not regular, yet each verse should have its own self-contained meter that is complimented by its surrounding verses. Using free verse as an excuse for bad poetry is pretty silly as the concept of free verse and the reasons behind no recurrent meter are the use of irregular rhythmic cadence and recurring resonance through selective sonics, with variations of phrases, images, and syntactical patterns. These reasons are defeated by sloppy structure just as much as irregular meter is harmful to intended formal metric poetry - my crits will elucidate on such matters.

Also, the link in my last post was intended as a helpful portal to magazines that accept exclusively formal poetry or that are formal-friendly publications.

In any case, I hope you enjoy these excerpts

I did actually. Why not go shovel through my shit and see if you can appreciate any of that.

Here, a few links to my least shitty pieces:

#284 (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=215090)

A Eulogy For Shadows (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214671)

She Is... (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=221508)

My Beach (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=223673)

Sorrobong Glade and the Arn's Groose (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=208086)

Visions of Lemonade (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=224321)

I try to marry concepts from formal poetry with free verse methodology, and experiment with formal verse -- the way I see it, if there was never any experimentation or release of trends, resurgence and renewal then poetry really would die - stagnated and stale. Rather than look down on younger forms or fresh voices, unorthodox methods or those that return to what is outdated, we should embrace all roads, and deviations of poetry on the whole. This is the only way it can evolve, and ultimately be what it is.

I love poetry for what it offers and what it allows to be expressed beyond the boundaries of common language and prose - but I don't believe it should just be a means for expression. Poetry, for me, is also a celebration of language and all the complexities that holds within it and what can be said between words, at times even without.

[JRH]

Kie

Let me first state that I made NO negative comments about the writers in this Forum. My negative comments were reserved for those who were unjustifiabley publshed by poetry Magazines.

Here is a poem which outlines my concept of what Poetry should be.

*******

Technically" it is not a "Poem", but "Didactic Verse" based on some of my "Critical Essays" which can, hopefully, lead to some discussion and provide some insight into how I write, while at the same time outlining tools that newcomers can use in perfecting their own craftsmanship.

Enjoy.

*******

"Writing Poetry?"

Poems flow freely from my pen,
For words obey my call,
And if you buy that fantasy,
You don't know Poems at all.

Poetry's an Art, a Craft
A gift too great to spurn,
But, writing it's no simple thing
It's a Skill that must be learned.

'Tis not enough to simply spew
Those things you sense inside,
Based on feelings, or based on thoughts,
That others may deride,

For there are few who have the gift
Of seeing as others do.
And if they can't perceive your mind,
They're bound to miss your truths.

Your goal is to communicate.
Your message must be clear,.
And private thoughts and images
May often seem obscure.

You have to organize your thoughts;
Know what you want to do;
Select the images you need;
Make plans and follow through,

And the Principles the Masters used
Can guide you on your quest,
For if they're used with discipline,
They'll help you do your best.

First you'll need a solid theme
To help define your goal,
Embodied in a subject,
That gives your work its soul.

Thoughts and images come next,
That bring your theme to life,
And they must be compatible,
Or else they'll bring you strife.

Cohesiveness and clarity
Should be your favorite tools,
For they can truly show your skills
And bring your message through.

And when your "Poem" comes to it's end,
Whatever that might be,
The reader should perceive a whole,
United and complete.

But, a few things must be mentioned,
As pitfalls to avoid,
Like using images for their own sake,
Or, setting meaning aside.

Nor, should words be used just to demonstrate
Erudition or verbal skills,.
No one cares how much you know,
And it's doubtful that they ever will..

And, the scope and depth of what you write
Must be considered first,
For they define the difference
T'wixt Poetry and Verse.

And it matters not what form you choose,
Be it Free Verse or Rhyme.
As long as meaning is conveyed,
It can last, transcending time.

So , always seek the "universal".....
The "personal" bears little weight,
And the goal is e'er to speak to all
In terms that can relate.

For, there's no end to struggling
In making words your own,
But, now, at least, you can understand,
What it takes to make a Poem

Copyright © 4 Nov 2007 James R. Hoye

******

And I don't thnk that these views are that much different than yours.

Write On,

Jim Hoye, (JRH)

[Blarg]

Just to throw some gasoline on the fire, I'd like to say that though I liked your poem, these two lines can be seen more than one way, and one way stands out to me as maybe a bit off:

So , always seek the "universal".....
The "personal" bears little weight, The personal conveyed artfully and with either insight pumped into it or a space created for the reader to use his own insight becomes universal. It strikes me that, conversely, poetry that is impersonal can sometimes lack that certain something ... you can probably guess what's coming ... that certain universality. It can feel like it is coming from on high and talking about somebody else besides the reader.

I get where you're going with those lines, though. But I think they leave room for a partial rather than full understanding of the value of the personal in poetry. And, perhaps, they may not nail down exactly what you meant.

[kborsden]

My negative comments were reserved for those who were unjustifiabley publshed by poetry Magazines.

That may be what you intended, but it isn't what you said:

I consider most of my poems superior to those that are being published and I think that the poems I've posted on these forums, under JRH, justify that opinion.

In any case, I'm not in the mood to argue, and in all fairness we probably are more or less on the same page when it comes to what we see as quality or what we expect from poetry in general.

As for justifiably published or not -- I think the justification is in the acceptance. If the editors and slush ninjas liked it enough to pay for it, print it, for whatever reason, be it trend, populist thinking, experimentalism or simply because it has commercial value - it's justified, whether you, I, or anyone else agrees with that reasoning or not.

It boils down to what is wanted, where and who wants it. There are many avenues to take in order to get yourself published, and many methods to get your submissions noticed and read to begin with. First know your markets, and what interest there may be for your work. I already gave you a pretty complete list of what may be best suited or available to you, but in case you missed it: http://www.ramblingrose.com/poetry/formalpubs.html. Read this thread (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=212806) which has a few tips and general outlines on how to submit, the attitude to adopt and how to present your poems. It is based on my personal experience, but I believe anyone can adapt what I've written to suit whichever market they submit to. Remember that the world is smaller than ever since the advent of the internet - don't be afraid to look into markets abroad; different countries, different trends and appreciations. For example, my work sells better in canada than in Britain. Don't exclude non-paying markets, credits and exposure add to your portfolio.

There are also smaller steps outside of the publishing world you could take to gain interest and attention - get involved with community or charity events - use your poetry to speak to people directly, again adding to your portfolio.

The industry has changed - but many poets haven't. That's the main issue here.

[KTC]

I would assert instead that impulse to write poetry is stronger than ever but the overall quality of the Verse , at least that presented in major magazines, has marketly declined and that such can be attributed to the current bias against Rhyme and Meter practiced by such markets which has made it extremely difficult for a classical Poet such as myself to get published even though I approach dozens if not hundreds of markets every year and have only about 25 sales to show in over 50 years of submissions even though I consider most of my poems superior to those that are being published and I think that the poems I've posted on these forums, under JRH, justify that opinion.

James R. Hoye (JRH)

Wow. As usual, an orange on a toothpick. Your estimation of yourself is awesome. Your dismissal of others...just plain insulting.

[Sleepyhead]

And I never said they write it only because they want it to be a career, what I meant was that poets wish they would make a career out of writing poetry because they enjoy it so much (I know i do)

I know I'd definitely love for it to be a career. It chafes me that only certain kinds of artists are supposed to create art for only the love of it, even though holding down full time jobs while we create that art sometimes taxes us beyond our abilities to create. Example: Garage bands get paid for gigs and visual artists are expected to sell their paintings, yet everyone in a community theatre is expected to perform for the love of theatre only. It's fine to write novels hoping for compensation, but we're somehow selfish if we'd like to do the same with poetry. Now, I know the issue is supply and demand, in both examples. The existing ratios may not change. But I think we do ourselves a disservice when we excuse market realities by burdening ourselves with guilt when we are dissatisfied with those realities. We are just as worth of respect as local musicians and visual artists, and we are as worthy of respect as novelists.

The personal conveyed artfully and with either insight pumped into it or a space created for the reader to use his own insight becomes universal.

Thank you. I often have a very confessional style of writing, and I write a lot of stuff from what we would consider an outsider's point of view. Yet most common comment I get from readers is, "I feel this way" or "I've felt this way." The second most common is, "This really touched me."

[kborsden]

I know I'd definitely love for it to be a career.

Then do something about it. Your dream may never come true, but there's no harm in submitting to see whether it can. Thing is, it's not exactly 40hour a week work is it -- but there's no reason why you can't branch your poetry into other fields, or expand your view.

We are just as worth of respect as local musicians and visual artists, and we are as worthy of respect as novelists.


Agreed. But I don't quite see what your problem is. If you want compensation or payment for your poetry, what are(n't) you doing about it?

Example: Garage bands get paid for gigs and visual artists are expected to sell their paintings, yet everyone in a community theatre is expected to perform for the love of theatre only. It's fine to write novels hoping for compensation, but we're somehow selfish if we'd like to do the same with poetry.

By whose account? And if you don't share that view, why do you care for as long as there are possibilities for payment and publishing opportunities?

we do ourselves a disservice when we excuse market realities by burdening ourselves with guilt when we are dissatisfied with those realities.

Which reality is that? And who's this we? I certainly don't feel guilt when I get paid for a poem... nor do I feel guilty when I submit one.

Now, I know the issue is supply and demand, in both examples.

And what is the issue with poetry in terms of supply and demand? Not enough supply, or demand?

[Paul]

the Q really is, are outlandish thread titles still fashionable?

[Sleepyhead]

Then do something about it. Your dream may never come true, but there's no harm in submitting to see whether it can. Thing is, it's not exactly 40hour a week work is it -- but there's no reason why you can't branch your poetry into other fields, or expand your view.

Um, I do. Been getting published in journals for years, and my first full collection came out last November. Not through a big press, to be sure, but not self published, either.

Agreed. But I don't quite see what your problem is. If you want compensation or payment for your poetry, what are(n't) you doing about it?

I'm writing and submitting, same as most others on this board.

By whose account? And if you don't share that view, why do you care for as long as there are possibilities for payment and publishing opportunities?

By whose account are bands paid and community theatre actors not? That's measurable, but I haven't prepared a report.

Or by whose account are poets who care about money seen as selfish? The implication to which groovyville was responding, and which led to my expansion of and addition to that response, was that poets should write only for the love. Was the word only in the original post? No. But again, I'm talking about the implication. And if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But I doubt very much that I'm the only one who read the comment as such. Perhaps this one can be chalked up to the vagaries of online communication.

I care for the same reasons I don't like to see injustice anywhere. Asking me why I care is a bit like asking me why I care about affordable healthcare in general when a lot of people still have good coverage.

Which reality is that? And who's this we? I certainly don't feel guilt when I get paid for a poem... nor do I feel guilty when I submit one.

The reality that there is less demand for poetry, at least for print poetry that one must purchase, than there is supply. I'm happy to hear that you don't feel guilty; I have never felt such guilt myself. But those who perpetuate the idea that a real artist doesn't give a damn about money would have those who do care about compensation believe they are feeling something wrong, which induces guilt.

And what is the issue with poetry in terms of supply and demand? Not enough supply, or demand?

I think it's rather obvious to most of us on this board that there are more people writing and submitting than there are purchasing poetry, but I don't have graphs or pie charts to back that up.

[kborsden]

Um, I do. Been getting published in journals for years, and my first full collection came out last November. Not through a big press, to be sure, but not self published, either.

I'm writing and submitting, same as most others on this board.

That's great! Your tone gave a somewhat deprecated impression and I intended my post as a motivational response --- so your sarcasm in later responses is most welcome ;)

I care for the same reasons I don't like to see injustice anywhere. Asking me why I care is a bit like asking me why I care about affordable healthcare in general when a lot of people still have good coverage.

It's not quite, is it. I think that that's being a bit melodramatic to be honest. The opportunity is there, but a few misinformed people perpetuate the idea of it either not being so, or not being right that it is. And those people don't submit their poetry -- less competition. Even if they did, would it matter?

The reality that there is less demand for poetry, at least for print poetry that one must purchase, than there is supply. I'm happy to hear that you don't feel guilty; I have never felt such guilt myself. But those who perpetuate the idea that a real artist doesn't give a damn about money would have those who do care about compensation believe they are feeling something wrong, which induces guilt.

Those people are idiots and their views do not effect me -- most are defeatist or embittered by lack of success.

I think it's rather obvious to most of us on this board that there are more people writing and submitting than there are purchasing poetry, but I don't have graphs or pie charts to back that up.

Exactly the way it should be.

[Sleepyhead]

It's not quite, is it. I think that that's being a bit melodramatic to be honest. The opportunity is there, but a few misinformed people perpetuate the idea of it either not being so, or not being right that it is. And those people don't submit their poetry -- less competition. Even if they did, would it matter?

I think it's just a matter of degree. I remember what it was like to write and write and write and then submit and submit and submit - and hear nothing. The first personalized rejection I got thrilled me beyond belief. (The journal rejected me after that also, btw. :)) Believe me, my rejections still WAY outnumber my acceptances, especially for paid outlets. So I agree that the opportunities are there, but I think many of the people bemoaning the dearth of them (and there is a dearth of paid outlets) are submitting. It's a discouraging business. Or calling. Or whatever it is I should call it that won't get someone jumping on the board telling me I called it the wrong thing.

But it's an excuse-making, elitist attitude that bothers me, not a lack of opportunities.

Those people are idiots and their views do not effect me -- most are defeatist or embittered by lack of success.

It might sound flaky, but I do really think that there is a relationship between the individual and the collective.

I freely admit to being not only irritated but also bored beyond belief by the whining, woe-is-me type - but I think many writers, many good writers, go through their own private moments of hellish self-doubt and almost unbearable frustration. I certainly did, and might again at some point.


Exactly the way it should be.

I would love to see the public at large go crazy for good poetry, because I think it's an under-appreciated art form. But I do admit that there is a little comfort in thinking that if I ever do become wildly financially successful by poetry world standards, the tabloids still won't give a damn about me.:D

[kborsden]

Believe me, my rejections still WAY outnumber my acceptances, especially for paid outlets.

Which is perfectly normal. If I were going to part with my cash, I'd like the work to be of a particular standard too. More money, more scrutiny.

(and there is a dearth of paid outlets)

! Sorry, but that's bullshit.

There are more non-paying markets than paying - true. But they are not scarce. Also, there are more avenues than just publications, journals and reviews dedicated to poetry; more avenues than just print or on line too.

But it's an excuse-making, elitist attitude that bothers me, not a lack of opportunities.

I'm sorry, I don't quite get this... whose excuse-making elitist attitude? Poet or publisher?

It might sound flaky, but I do really think that there is a relationship between the individual and the collective.

Of course there is.

[Sleepyhead]

Which is perfectly normal. If I were going to part with my cash, I'd like the work to be of a particular standard too. More money, more scrutiny.

Of course.



! Sorry, but that's bullshit.

There are more non-paying markets than paying - true. But they are not scarce. Also, there are more avenues than just publications, journals and reviews dedicated to poetry; more avenues than just print or on line too.

I think we're just approaching this from two different perspectives. Relative to market demand, no, there probably isn't a dearth. In sheer numbers as compared to outlets for other forms of writing, there is.



I'm sorry, I don't quite get this... whose excuse-making elitist attitude? Poet or publisher?

Poet. I can't prove it, but I suspect the whole "poets should write only for the love of it" is sometimes a way of self-soothing when discouraged. How very highbrow to be above such petty concerns as cash.

[KTC]

Poet. I can't prove it, but I suspect the whole "poets should write only for the love of it" is sometimes a way of self-soothing when discouraged. How very highbrow to be above such petty concerns as cash.

Well, I for one make a nice chunk of change of my poetry. I've had calendar years where my poetry brought in well over $2,000.00. I still believe POETS SHOULD WRITE ONLY FOR THE LOVE OF IT. Though, it's important to define the IT of it. The IT is language. The poet should write because they love the sound of language. Fuck the money. You can scrub sewers for money. Money should never motivate a poet. Word love...now that's sexy.

Kevin, who makes money selling poetry---not writing it.

[kborsden]

Relative to market demand, no, there probably isn't a dearth. In sheer numbers as compared to outlets for other forms of writing, there is.

Hmm... just what does the number of outlets for creative prose and journalism have to do with poetry?

Poet. I can't prove it, but I suspect the whole "poets should write only for the love of it" is sometimes a way of self-soothing when discouraged. How very highbrow to be above such petty concerns as cash.

It's also a key-element of why anybody would/should/does write. If you don't love it, don't do it. Write for the love, sell/publish for the money.

I love poetry for what it offers and what it allows to be expressed beyond the boundaries of common language and prose - but I don't believe it should just be a means for expression. Poetry, for me, is also a celebration of language and all the complexities that holds within it and what can be said between words, at times even without.

This is why I write poetry - because of my love for it and appreciation of it.


Kevin, who makes money selling poetry---not writing it.

Ditto.