Comments on: Everybody Gets to Go to the Moon: An Extended Letter for the Print Magazine which I’ll Just Post Here http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/ Thu, 12 Jan 2012 08:40:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Jason Guriel http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7880 Jason Guriel Wed, 18 Mar 2009 23:06:14 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7880 Thanks to those who have kept this thread going, including Matt and Thomas. Michael and Dwayne, I appreciate your thoughts. Annie, good point. Ange, good link. Thanks to those who have kept this thread going, including Matt and Thomas.
Michael and Dwayne, I appreciate your thoughts.
Annie, good point. Ange, good link.
Report this comment

]]> By: thomas brady http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7879 thomas brady Mon, 16 Mar 2009 11:56:15 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7879 A sentence is parsed and meter is scanned. Rhyme aids the ear in noting the meter. Readers prefer poetry that is closer to prose, with the line that is seen, not heard. Singers prefer poetry closer to verse, with a line that is heard, not seen. The greater skill is saying prose-like things with the added coloration of meter and rhyme. The sort of contemplation that goes with reading silently and seeing lines as opposed to hearing them cannot be ignored, certainly, but the best poetry, even the best verse, can welcome this sort of contemplation. But this sort of contemplation bereft of poetry adds nothing else, really. Thus my sympathy is with the singers. A sentence is parsed and meter is scanned.
Rhyme aids the ear in noting the meter.
Readers prefer poetry that is closer to prose, with the line that is seen, not heard.
Singers prefer poetry closer to verse, with a line that is heard, not seen.
The greater skill is saying prose-like things with the added coloration of meter and rhyme.
The sort of contemplation that goes with reading silently and seeing lines as opposed to hearing them cannot be ignored, certainly, but the best poetry, even the best verse, can welcome this sort of contemplation. But this sort of contemplation bereft of poetry adds nothing else, really.
Thus my sympathy is with the singers.
Report this comment

]]> By: Matt http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7878 Matt Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:12:38 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7878 Once again: there is no "war on Christmas". Once again: there is no “war on Christmas”.
Report this comment

]]> By: Ange Mlinko http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7877 Ange Mlinko Sun, 15 Mar 2009 12:55:57 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7877 I love just about everything the elegant A.E. writes, but for a fuller picture of the "rhyming wars," at least in Britain, check out the estimable Ruth Padel on the subject: <a href="http://www.ruthpadel.com/pages/rhyming_wars.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.ruthpadel.com/pages/rhyming_wars.htm</a> It's edifying. I love just about everything the elegant A.E. writes, but for a fuller picture of the “rhyming wars,” at least in Britain, check out the estimable Ruth Padel on the subject:
http://www.ruthpadel.com/pages/rhyming_wars.htm
It’s edifying.
Report this comment

]]> By: dwayne http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7876 dwayne Sun, 15 Mar 2009 05:31:38 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7876 Jason, I thought the AE Stallings manifesto was dope. And, what people haven't seemed to speak on, in regards to rhyme, is that the rhyme is only going to be as strong as the the words that precede it. So while "of" may seem to be predictably followed by "love" it is the words that precede both "of" and "love" that make the poem. Also, I just realize that I've repeated your last point. But, I guess it serves repeating, because here, as with most places, discussions of rhyme seem to focus just on the rhyme and not what precedes it. Jason,
I thought the AE Stallings manifesto was dope. And, what people haven’t seemed to speak on, in regards to rhyme, is that the rhyme is only going to be as strong as the the words that precede it. So while “of” may seem to be predictably followed by “love” it is the words that precede both “of” and “love” that make the poem.
Also, I just realize that I’ve repeated your last point. But, I guess it serves repeating, because here, as with most places, discussions of rhyme seem to focus just on the rhyme and not what precedes it.
Report this comment

]]> By: Annie Finch http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7875 Annie Finch Sat, 14 Mar 2009 21:17:03 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7875 I am also a big fan of Stallings' manifesto. And I agree that cliched rhymes have no limit. On the other hand, I wouldn't make that claim ahistoricallly. We are receptive to this idea nowadays exactly because such cliches have been scrupulously avoided for so long in serious poetry (just about a century) that by now they can become fresh and surprising again. Annie I am also a big fan of Stallings’ manifesto. And I agree that cliched rhymes have no limit. On the other hand, I wouldn’t make that claim ahistoricallly. We are receptive to this idea nowadays exactly because such cliches have been scrupulously avoided for so long in serious poetry (just about a century) that by now they can become fresh and surprising again.
Annie
Report this comment

]]> By: Michael Martin http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7874 Michael Martin Sat, 14 Mar 2009 15:24:48 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7874 I can dig it. Spent my whole earl development writing prose which sole aim was to turn cliches on their heads like breakdancers baby. But then, like you said, those unofficial rules crept in. Not sure when it happened, or why, how. But it did. I think that rule of "no tired rhymes" was a way to spur writers into new unfound directions. And to go down that route using those rhymes would be more difficult than abandoning them, calling condemned, pushed the writer into that new territory. But the problem is --- you called it --- we don't go back to that old territory and reclaim, rebuild what we left behind. We see all this new stuff and we're excited and we forget. Hey, moon and doom can rhyme. We even used it. And it was 'cool'. And just 'cause it was cool then doesn't mean it can't be now. I can dig it.
Spent my whole earl development writing prose which sole aim was to turn cliches on their heads like breakdancers baby. But then, like you said, those unofficial rules crept in. Not sure when it happened, or why, how. But it did.
I think that rule of “no tired rhymes” was a way to spur writers into new unfound directions. And to go down that route using those rhymes would be more difficult than abandoning them, calling condemned, pushed the writer into that new territory.
But the problem is — you called it — we don’t go back to that old territory and reclaim, rebuild what we left behind. We see all this new stuff and we’re excited and we forget.
Hey, moon and doom can rhyme. We even used it. And it was ‘cool’.
And just ’cause it was cool then doesn’t mean it can’t be now.
Report this comment

]]> By: Cathy Halley http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7873 Cathy Halley Fri, 13 Mar 2009 20:21:18 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7873 Gentle reminder: When you leave comments, please include your name and email address. It is our policy not publish anonymous comments. Gentle reminder: When you leave comments, please include your name and email address. It is our policy not publish anonymous comments.
Report this comment

]]> By: Jason Guriel http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7872 Jason Guriel Fri, 13 Mar 2009 18:30:19 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7872 Reasonable points, Thomas. Thanks for them. I'm not suggesting poems need to have a "giant SURPRISE," and I'm not suggesting poets be reckless for the sake of novelty. Still, if a poem is going to use "love" and "of" it helps if the rhyme is arrived at, as you suggest, in an "interesting way," which seems to be Stallings' point. I think Chip's clarification helps. Thanks, Bill, for the link. Paul and J Diego Frey, thanks for the comments. I love the point about comebacks. Tyrone, thanks. Houston's album is great, isn't it? A friend of mine contends that her "Jumping Jack Flash" is the definitive, and he may be right. Reasonable points, Thomas. Thanks for them. I’m not suggesting poems need to have a “giant SURPRISE,” and I’m not suggesting poets be reckless for the sake of novelty. Still, if a poem is going to use “love” and “of” it helps if the rhyme is arrived at, as you suggest, in an “interesting way,” which seems to be Stallings’ point. I think Chip’s clarification helps.
Thanks, Bill, for the link.
Paul and J Diego Frey, thanks for the comments. I love the point about comebacks.
Tyrone, thanks. Houston’s album is great, isn’t it? A friend of mine contends that her “Jumping Jack Flash” is the definitive, and he may be right.
Report this comment

]]> By: Chip Corwin http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7871 Chip Corwin Fri, 13 Mar 2009 18:11:17 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7871 Thomas, I would argue that predictability and surprise are not *necessarily* related in the same way that, say, the volume of an object and its fluid displacement are related. I guess I'm saying there is no "law of surprise/predictability" because they don't have that cause/effect relationship. I think we are generally in agreement; I just think your examples were mixed. In your first post that I responded to, you set up two opposites: surprise/predictability and stale/original. I would say that those would be better stated as surprising/stale and predictable/original. Chip Thomas,
I would argue that predictability and surprise are not *necessarily* related in the same way that, say, the volume of an object and its fluid displacement are related. I guess I’m saying there is no “law of surprise/predictability” because they don’t have that cause/effect relationship.
I think we are generally in agreement; I just think your examples were mixed. In your first post that I responded to, you set up two opposites: surprise/predictability and stale/original. I would say that those would be better stated as surprising/stale and predictable/original.
Chip
Report this comment

]]> By: thomas brady http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7870 thomas brady Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:47:56 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7870 Chip, 'Better opposites for "surprising" may be "bloodless," "dead," "inert," or "boring." ' I don't know about that. The "dead" may surprise the hell out of us. But seriously, I do think the predictable and the surprising are related, but I think what you're getting at is if you *raise* the predictability factor you are then *raising* the potential for surprise--is that what you mean? Yea, so we know a Shakespeare sonnet is going to end with a rhyming couplet, and that part is predictable, but that has nothing to do with how surprising/or not the end of Shakespeare's sonnet is going to be. I think this is the point you are making, and I agree. I suppose if Shakespeare wrote 154 sonnets which all ended with an of/love rhyme, we could still be pleasantly surprised by all of them. But we might say to ourselves, 'why is S. creating such a difficult challenge for himself? Of/love 154 times?? Is the guy bonkers?' Yet why not apply this to writing 154 poems that all need to follow the rules of a sonnet? Why would a genius like S. confine himself so, when no law says he must? Surely his genius would speak out better if it were less confined? Did S. do so because of the law of surprise/predictability, or was he merely writing sonnets because other poets at the time were also writing sonnets and he was proving his skill in this area? Thomas Chip,
‘Better opposites for “surprising” may be “bloodless,” “dead,” “inert,” or “boring.” ‘
I don’t know about that. The “dead” may surprise the hell out of us.
But seriously, I do think the predictable and the surprising are related, but I think what you’re getting at is if you *raise* the predictability factor you are then *raising* the potential for surprise–is that what you mean?
Yea, so we know a Shakespeare sonnet is going to end with a rhyming couplet, and that part is predictable, but that has nothing to do with how surprising/or not the end of Shakespeare’s sonnet is going to be. I think this is the point you are making, and I agree.
I suppose if Shakespeare wrote 154 sonnets which all ended with an of/love rhyme, we could still be pleasantly surprised by all of them.
But we might say to ourselves, ‘why is S. creating such a difficult challenge for himself? Of/love 154 times?? Is the guy bonkers?’
Yet why not apply this to writing 154 poems that all need to follow the rules of a sonnet? Why would a genius like S. confine himself so, when no law says he must? Surely his genius would speak out better if it were less confined?
Did S. do so because of the law of surprise/predictability, or was he merely writing sonnets because other poets at the time were also writing sonnets and he was proving his skill in this area?
Thomas
Report this comment

]]> By: Chip Corwin http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7869 Chip Corwin Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:52:32 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7869 I know Shakespeare ends his sonnets with a rhymed couplet. That's predictable. What generates surprise is how he does it. I think that's what you're getting at, Thomas, with the love/of and stale/original examples. But note that predictability and surprise are two unrelated things. An increase in one does not mean a decrease in the other. Better opposites for "surprising" may be "bloodless," "dead," "inert," or "boring." I know Shakespeare ends his sonnets with a rhymed couplet. That’s predictable. What generates surprise is how he does it. I think that’s what you’re getting at, Thomas, with the love/of and stale/original examples. But note that predictability and surprise are two unrelated things. An increase in one does not mean a decrease in the other. Better opposites for “surprising” may be “bloodless,” “dead,” “inert,” or “boring.”
Report this comment

]]> By: thomas brady http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7868 thomas brady Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:00:02 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7868 Jason, What's wrong with a little predictability? Does *everything* HAVE to be one giant SURPRISE? Many a poet has been wrecked upon that rock. OK, here's "of" and now I know "love" is coming...but...it might come in an interesting way...so bring it on...bring on the "love." It's not going to kill me as a reader to know it's coming. Obviously we want the original and not the stale, but the original, as people have been pointing out, invariably uses the old... Thomas Jason,
What’s wrong with a little predictability?
Does *everything* HAVE to be one giant SURPRISE? Many a poet has been wrecked upon that rock.
OK, here’s “of” and now I know “love” is coming…but…it might come in an interesting way…so bring it on…bring on the “love.” It’s not going to kill me as a reader to know it’s coming.
Obviously we want the original and not the stale, but the original, as people have been pointing out, invariably uses the old…
Thomas
Report this comment

]]> By: Tyrone Williams http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7867 Tyrone Williams Fri, 13 Mar 2009 03:35:43 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7867 Never thought I'd see one of my songwriting heroes--Jimmy Webb--show up on this site. Thanks Jason! Tyrone p.s.--the definitive version of the song is Thelma Houston's on her underappreciated debut, Sunshower. Never thought I’d see one of my songwriting heroes–Jimmy Webb–show up on this site. Thanks Jason!
Tyrone
p.s.–the definitive version of the song is Thelma Houston’s on her underappreciated debut, Sunshower.
Report this comment

]]> By: J Diego Frey http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7866 J Diego Frey Fri, 13 Mar 2009 03:31:53 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7866 Three cheers for Stallings, and two points about the issue of cliched or "tired" rhymes: 2. As to rehabilitating cliches: whatever else, Americans love a comeback story. You can't go wrong with a good comeback story. I think maybe the only people who love this more are the Brits. 1. Sometimes a poet finds himself needing to rhyme on a word that has very few rhyming analogues. "Heaven" is a good example. (Don't laugh--there's no reason why a good poem can't be written about heaven.) I think that the poet that starts with the moon and flies past it on a spoon and pulls me effectively and enthusiastically along--that's a good poet. Three cheers for Stallings, and two points about the issue of cliched or “tired” rhymes:
2. As to rehabilitating cliches: whatever else, Americans love a comeback story. You can’t go wrong with a good comeback story. I think maybe the only people who love this more are the Brits.
1. Sometimes a poet finds himself needing to rhyme on a word that has very few rhyming analogues. “Heaven” is a good example. (Don’t laugh–there’s no reason why a good poem can’t be written about heaven.) I think that the poet that starts with the moon and flies past it on a spoon and pulls me effectively and enthusiastically along–that’s a good poet.
Report this comment

]]> By: Bill Knott http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7865 Bill Knott Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:23:29 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7865 maybe it's Stallings' manifesto that's occasioned me to publish a selection of my rhymed poems, a book which can be downloaded (in pdf) for free—— see "The Trespass and Other End-Rhymed Poems / A Selection from 1968-2008" at: <a href="http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=2254674" rel="nofollow">http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=2254674</a> .... maybe it’s Stallings’ manifesto that’s occasioned me to publish a selection of my rhymed poems, a book
which can be downloaded (in pdf) for free——
see “The Trespass and Other End-Rhymed Poems / A Selection from 1968-2008″
at:
http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=2254674
….
Report this comment

]]> By: Jason Guriel http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7864 Jason Guriel Thu, 12 Mar 2009 20:51:34 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7864 Bobby, if you perceive a shift in my thinking, and are "happily surprised" by it, then I'm glad. The perceived shift may just be a momentary lapse, though. Still, I appreciate your comments. Thomas, I love Stallings' manifesto, too, which was the main reason for the post. And Vendler's words did not have too lasting an impact, though I never did finish the villanelle; but I remain a sucker for rhyme, even the monosyllabic kind, though I know some poets who are quite wary of it. I'm curious what others think about Stallings' manifesto.... Bobby, if you perceive a shift in my thinking, and are “happily surprised” by it, then I’m glad. The perceived shift may just be a momentary lapse, though. Still, I appreciate your comments.
Thomas, I love Stallings’ manifesto, too, which was the main reason for the post. And Vendler’s words did not have too lasting an impact, though I never did finish the villanelle; but I remain a sucker for rhyme, even the monosyllabic kind, though I know some poets who are quite wary of it.
I’m curious what others think about Stallings’ manifesto….
Report this comment

]]> By: Paul Squires http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7863 Paul Squires Thu, 12 Mar 2009 20:50:30 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7863 It seems to me there is a gradual acknowledgement that the way forward for contemporary poetry is a return to a more overt musicality. The best thing about that is that you can fake it. Either you can hear the music in language or you can't. Of course, this will be accompanied by the sneerings of the intelligensia and accusations of populism. It seems to me there is a gradual acknowledgement that the way forward for contemporary poetry is a return to a more overt musicality. The best thing about that is that you can fake it. Either you can hear the music in language or you can’t. Of course, this will be accompanied by the sneerings of the intelligensia and accusations of populism.
Report this comment

]]> By: Michael Theune http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7862 Michael Theune Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:30:25 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7862 Thanks for the clarifications, Bobby! Yes, agreed: indeed, we largely learn poems' forms, shapes, patterns, structures, tendencies, tics, so that we might better avoid the formulaic, and (so)create surprise. Thanks for the clarifications, Bobby! Yes, agreed: indeed, we largely learn poems’ forms, shapes, patterns, structures, tendencies, tics, so that we might better avoid the formulaic, and (so)create surprise.
Report this comment

]]> By: Bobby http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7861 Bobby Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:45:00 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7861 Michael, sure: given I just wrote, I absolutely wouldn't want to say (and didn't) that clichés can't be turned to impressive effect. They are all the time. My completely banal point is that it's not just language but also poetic moves that can become formulaic--predictable--which is demonstrated fairly well by the fact that that you can name them as neatly as you do on your blog. Like Jason, I want poems to surprise me; it's been a long time since one of Kay Ryan's has. Michael, sure: given I just wrote, I absolutely wouldn’t want to say (and didn’t) that clichés can’t be turned to impressive effect. They are all the time. My completely banal point is that it’s not just language but also poetic moves that can become formulaic–predictable–which is demonstrated fairly well by the fact that that you can name them as neatly as you do on your blog. Like Jason, I want poems to surprise me; it’s been a long time since one of Kay Ryan’s has.
Report this comment

]]> By: Bobby http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7860 Bobby Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:31:48 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7860 >"Everybody gets to go to the moon, or, at least, gets to use whichever moony words and rhymes they wish, as long as the use of such words and rhymes isn’t predictable." Sorry, but I don't understand why this is supposed to be clarifying. Vendler's beef against a predictable rhyme like "love/of" is that it's, well, predictable. We read "of" in the first line of a villanelle and we get—surprise!—"love" in line three. No amount of genius is going to make that rhyme pair (qua rhyme pair) unpredictable, but you and I and Stallings like to imagine that there are cases in which it might lend itself to a larger surprise generated by the context of the line or the poem. Nor would I quarrel with this, which doesn't quite capture my own feelings but comes close enough: > "If poems don't use language in an unpredictable way I don't want to read them." What I object to is the way your review narrowly construes "us[ing] language in an unpredictable way" with the generation of game-changing metaphors--a standard that shows in your reviews of Mead and Powell as well, albeit with slight variations. (As when you contrast whatever Mead's doing with the "specific, vivid images" of Ormsby.) The world of contemporary poetry is just too various for this kind of criterion to be much use. Call it a difference of taste if you like, but I don't think that lets you off the hook, especially if you're going to criticize, as you did, "most" of the books of poetry being published today. In a completely different context, Wyatt Mason <a href="http://harpers.org/archive/2009/02/hbc-90004468" rel="nofollow">wrote recently</a>: <blockquote>I would submit that these categoricals, and the kinds of reviewers who hold such proscriptive aesthetic points of view, are diminishing: some kinds of narrowness are narrowing.</blockquote> Let the negative review flourish, by all means, but let's put it in the service of broadening our aesthetic sensitivity, not restricting it. Your post here moves significantly in that direction, which is why I was happily surprised by it; I'd think it sad if this were just a momentary lapse. >”Everybody gets to go to the moon, or, at least, gets to use whichever moony words and rhymes they wish, as long as the use of such words and rhymes isn’t predictable.”
Sorry, but I don’t understand why this is supposed to be clarifying.
Vendler’s beef against a predictable rhyme like “love/of” is that it’s, well, predictable. We read “of” in the first line of a villanelle and we get—surprise!—”love” in line three. No amount of genius is going to make that rhyme pair (qua rhyme pair) unpredictable, but you and I and Stallings like to imagine that there are cases in which it might lend itself to a larger surprise generated by the context of the line or the poem.
Nor would I quarrel with this, which doesn’t quite capture my own feelings but comes close enough:
> “If poems don’t use language in an unpredictable way I don’t want to read them.”
What I object to is the way your review narrowly construes “us[ing] language in an unpredictable way” with the generation of game-changing metaphors–a standard that shows in your reviews of Mead and Powell as well, albeit with slight variations. (As when you contrast whatever Mead’s doing with the “specific, vivid images” of Ormsby.) The world of contemporary poetry is just too various for this kind of criterion to be much use.
Call it a difference of taste if you like, but I don’t think that lets you off the hook, especially if you’re going to criticize, as you did, “most” of the books of poetry being published today. In a completely different context, Wyatt Mason wrote recently:

I would submit that these categoricals, and the kinds of reviewers who hold such proscriptive aesthetic points of view, are diminishing: some kinds of narrowness are narrowing.

Let the negative review flourish, by all means, but let’s put it in the service of broadening our aesthetic sensitivity, not restricting it. Your post here moves significantly in that direction, which is why I was happily surprised by it; I’d think it sad if this were just a momentary lapse.
Report this comment

]]> By: thomas brady http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7859 thomas brady Thu, 12 Mar 2009 16:40:15 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7859 Jason, I loved Stallings' manifesto. As for Vendler, A few years ago, Helen Vendler’s review of Elizabeth Bishop’s unpublished scraps gave me pause – or, rather, pressed pause on the production of a poem of mine. I had been working on a villanelle that used the rhyme love/of, among others. But then I read Vendler on Bishop’s sonnet “Washington as a Surveyor”: “[I]ts tired end-words include ‘love,’ ‘of,’ ‘move,’ and ‘enough,’ and the rhymes, except for ‘enough’ and ‘unlined,’ are all monosyllabic (the easiest kind for a novice to make).” All I can say is this: Rhyme has a moral dimension. The dour do not like it. The dogmatic would police it. As music, the Blues is far narrower than if there were a poetry that only rhymed with moon--and the Blues delights us not a whit less for that reason. The Vendlers of the world, never having vied with Down In The Valley on a xylophone, much less Mozart on a violin, object to music as a puritan would, with principled vigor—and utter ignorance. Thomas Jason,
I loved Stallings’ manifesto.
As for Vendler,
A few years ago, Helen Vendler’s review of Elizabeth Bishop’s unpublished scraps gave me pause – or, rather, pressed pause on the production of a poem of mine. I had been working on a villanelle that used the rhyme love/of, among others. But then I read Vendler on Bishop’s sonnet “Washington as a Surveyor”:
“[I]ts tired end-words include ‘love,’ ‘of,’ ‘move,’ and ‘enough,’ and the rhymes, except for ‘enough’ and ‘unlined,’ are all monosyllabic (the easiest kind for a novice to make).”
All I can say is this:
Rhyme has a moral dimension.
The dour do not like it. The dogmatic would police it.
As music, the Blues is far narrower than if there were a poetry that only rhymed with moon–and the Blues delights us not a whit less for that reason.
The Vendlers of the world, never having vied with Down In The Valley on a xylophone, much less Mozart on a violin, object to music as a puritan would, with principled vigor—and utter ignorance.
Thomas
Report this comment

]]> By: Michael Theune http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7858 Michael Theune Thu, 12 Mar 2009 16:14:38 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7858 I also wrote "it's" where I intended "its"--the Bolivian keyboard virus is spreading! I also wrote “it’s” where I intended “its”–the Bolivian keyboard virus is spreading!
Report this comment

]]> By: Michael Theune http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7857 Michael Theune Thu, 12 Mar 2009 15:46:55 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7857 >And I know that Kay Ryan thinks she's terribly clever in her rehabilitation efforts, but isn't turning a cliché on its head a pretty basic skill for a serious writer? So basic, in fact, that it can very easily become formulaic--as I'd say it does in Ryan's work--and thus a kind of second-order cliché? Turning a cliche on it's head certainly is a basic skill for a serious writer, Bobby--but I'm not so sure that I'd call all such overturnings second-order cliches. Some pretty great, inventive poems try to overturn cliches, including John Davies's "Some blaze the precious beauties of their loves...," Whitman's "Death's Valley," Staceyann Chin's "I Don't Want to Slam," Zbigniew Herbert's "I Would Like to Describe," and even Wilfred Owen's "Dulce et Decorum Est." (If you want links to many of these poems, go to <a href="http://structureandsurprise.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow">http://structureandsurprise.wordpress.com</a> and click on "The Cliche-and-Critique Structure.") Rather than a first or second-order undertaking, the critique of cliches is a tool for, a method, an approach to poem-making--it certainly can be used to make formulaic work, but it also can be used powerfully, movingly. Mike >And I know that Kay Ryan thinks she’s terribly clever in her rehabilitation efforts, but isn’t turning a cliché on its head a pretty basic skill for a serious writer? So basic, in fact, that it can very easily become formulaic–as I’d say it does in Ryan’s work–and thus a kind of second-order cliché?
Turning a cliche on it’s head certainly is a basic skill for a serious writer, Bobby–but I’m not so sure that I’d call all such overturnings second-order cliches. Some pretty great, inventive poems try to overturn cliches, including John Davies’s “Some blaze the precious beauties of their loves…,” Whitman’s “Death’s Valley,” Staceyann Chin’s “I Don’t Want to Slam,” Zbigniew Herbert’s “I Would Like to Describe,” and even Wilfred Owen’s “Dulce et Decorum Est.” (If you want links to many of these poems, go to http://structureandsurprise.wordpress.com and click on “The Cliche-and-Critique Structure.”) Rather than a first or second-order undertaking, the critique of cliches is a tool for, a method, an approach to poem-making–it certainly can be used to make formulaic work, but it also can be used powerfully, movingly.
Mike
Report this comment

]]> By: Jason Guriel http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7856 Jason Guriel Thu, 12 Mar 2009 15:30:21 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7856 Bobby, thanks for your comments. But if you continue my quote, one sentence more, you will find: "Everybody gets to go to the moon, or, at least, gets to use whichever moony words and rhymes they wish, as long as the use of such words and rhymes isn’t predictable." The key word is "predictable" and I found Poch's use of language occasionally "predictable". But I thought one of his metaphors, quoted in my original review, brilliant. So I haven't changed my mind. If poems don't use language in an unpredictable way I don't want to read them. And I think "turning a cliche on its head" is harder than it looks, even for serious writers. Bobby, thanks for your comments. But if you continue my quote, one sentence more, you will find: “Everybody gets to go to the moon, or, at least, gets to use whichever moony words and rhymes they wish, as long as the use of such words and rhymes isn’t predictable.” The key word is “predictable” and I found Poch’s use of language occasionally “predictable”. But I thought one of his metaphors, quoted in my original review, brilliant. So I haven’t changed my mind. If poems don’t use language in an unpredictable way I don’t want to read them. And I think “turning a cliche on its head” is harder than it looks, even for serious writers.
Report this comment

]]> By: Bobby http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7855 Bobby Thu, 12 Mar 2009 14:57:34 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7855 And before Michael Robbins gets to me: for "it's" in that second parenthesis read "its"--Bolivian keyboards have an odd habit of inserting inappropriate apostrophes. And before Michael Robbins gets to me: for “it’s” in that second parenthesis read “its”–Bolivian keyboards have an odd habit of inserting inappropriate apostrophes.
Report this comment

]]> By: Bobby http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2009/03/everybody-gets-to-go-to-the-moon-an-extended-letter-for-the-print-magazine-which-i%e2%80%99ll-just-post-here/#comment-7854 Bobby Thu, 12 Mar 2009 14:52:46 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=1299#comment-7854 >Perhaps, though, this point about tired rhyme – that it doesn't exist – can be extended to the straw man of tired language in general. Perhaps there are no tired words or tired phrases, only tired poets, poets who don’t have the energy to pinch a cliché’s nose and breathe some life into it, who don’t have the breath to give in the first place, the courage to confront an apparent dead-end and stride into it. Well, okay, but what does that mean for your lament about "the lack of game-changing metaphors" in John Poch's book (and "most of the collections which smart, well-meaning editors, even now, are FedExing to their rosters of reviewers") this month in the print magazine? I'm hoping it means you've changed your mind. I didn't like that lament when you first made it: I love a good surprising metaphor or rhyme as much as anyone, but to use the lack of such to condemn a poem or a book seems a pretty lazy form of criticism. (I felt the same about your habit of judging a book, ah-hem, by it's cover--or at least by the blurbs shouting out from the cover.) If what you're suggesting now is that we ought to judge poems as poems and not as collections of candidates for <em>Bartlett's</em>, then yes, by all means, let's. But isn't that what we ought to have been doing all along? And I know that Kay Ryan thinks she's terribly clever in her rehabilitation efforts, but isn't turning a cliché on its head a pretty basic skill for a serious writer? So basic, in fact, that it can very easily become formulaic--as I'd say it does in Ryan's work--and thus a kind of second-order cliché? >Perhaps, though, this point about tired rhyme – that it doesn’t exist – can be extended to the straw man of tired language in general. Perhaps there are no tired words or tired phrases, only tired poets, poets who don’t have the energy to pinch a cliché’s nose and breathe some life into it, who don’t have the breath to give in the first place, the courage to confront an apparent dead-end and stride into it.
Well, okay, but what does that mean for your lament about “the lack of game-changing metaphors” in John Poch’s book (and “most of the collections which smart, well-meaning editors, even now, are FedExing to their rosters of reviewers”) this month in the print magazine?
I’m hoping it means you’ve changed your mind. I didn’t like that lament when you first made it: I love a good surprising metaphor or rhyme as much as anyone, but to use the lack of such to condemn a poem or a book seems a pretty lazy form of criticism. (I felt the same about your habit of judging a book, ah-hem, by it’s cover–or at least by the blurbs shouting out from the cover.) If what you’re suggesting now is that we ought to judge poems as poems and not as collections of candidates for Bartlett’s, then yes, by all means, let’s. But isn’t that what we ought to have been doing all along?
And I know that Kay Ryan thinks she’s terribly clever in her rehabilitation efforts, but isn’t turning a cliché on its head a pretty basic skill for a serious writer? So basic, in fact, that it can very easily become formulaic–as I’d say it does in Ryan’s work–and thus a kind of second-order cliché?
Report this comment

]]>