August 2012



Powered by InsaneJournal


Not going to lie ij, I am unreasonably angry right now.  I hate Advanced Poetry class so much.  My professor gives us writing prompts every Monday and this Monday he didn't realize that he gave us pretty much the same prompt he gave us last week!  Last week we got four prompts one of them was "write a poem addressing as person or other" (with the implication that is should be sort of like a letter).  This week he told us to "write a letter to someone in the form of a poem".  I was pretty annoyed.  More annoyed when he just left it like that.  

Then he gave us a hand out from a book and couldn't tell us what book he had photocopied the pieces from.  Correct me if I'm wrong but that isn't just irresponsible but it also has copy right issues.

Then we reviewed a person's poem today who made reference to Eros and he didn't know who Eros was.  Even if you didn't know there was reference to love, wooing and arrows...not exactly brain surgery there.  

What might have been the topping on the cake for me might have been the choice "critiques" he made on my poem.  Now the first poem I handed in wasn't really good, that he wrote a bad critique is kind of excusable because you know there wasn't much for him to work with.  This poem though, I think there was a lot to work with.  I can think of three or four questions that would have been worth exploring or bringing up (of course I am the author).  

Now IJ, I bring this poem to you.  It isn't long, just 24 lines.  I would like you to read it and see if the comments he wrote up on it were fair.  Because you know, I can't be a good judge of my own work and maybe he does have points (even has a bad teacher) that I should look at. 

My basic thoughts on the work are that it isn't my best, but it isn't my worst either.  I think that there are things to clarify the meanings I intended, but that the basic idea of the poem is clear.  I don't know take a look for yourself and see if his comments are accurate about what I should or should not do.

So Yeah, Six Years Later

“Just wondering how was your day?”
“Depends, do you like sushi?”
“Vegetable or fish?”

“Well, that's just it,
           you know how it can be hard to tell?”
“Maybe the seaweed just makes it all taste like fish or something,
            you know?”

“Yeah, I guess, is this going somewhere?”
“Should it be?”
“Well I just assumed, you know?”
“Can't say I do, elaborate?”

“It was a normal day, right?
I mean no fear or worry or hurt
But nothing beautiful or meaningful either.
Then you asked me,
And I was so tired of the silence,
I figured there had to be something.
The weather is such a sad conversation piece.
How are you?”

“Um, well enough I guess-”

“So, tell me about that sushi,”
“Was it any good or what?”

"Jessica-I sense that there is something important you have to say...about communication?  how does the title tie in?  Who are the two speakers?  Also I would set it up differently-no '  ' open speaker in italics space between speakers"  He also makes a question mark near the title and a circle in the first line between the words "wondering" and "how", I assume because he wants a comma/ thinks it requires a comma.

I'm not sure the structure is in its final form.  I like the space between the lines "Um, well enough I guess-" and "So, tell me about that sushi," because I like the visual representation of the pause. 

Part of me is sorry I couldn't make every line in the poem a question, which is part of what I intially intended.  I like the idea of an entire conversation in questions.  I like the title because I think it works with the poem, though I'm waiting for a larger jury to tell me if it is too vague. 

I'll say that perhaps I need to identify who the characters are, but I'm wondering to some degree if it matters.  I mean whether this is two friends, a parent and kid, a counselor and counselee, or two aquiantences does it really change the message?  If you take the title as a place (six years down the road from where they are now), it sort of helps rule out the last two kinds of relationships in a lot of ways anyhow.   I mean the desire to really connect to a person you once knew only  happens when you had a meaningful relationship with them at some point.

I'm more interested in breaking down and asking if a conversation poem like this is as effective at getting across the idea as an imagistic poem or narrative one could be.  The idea is that people fade away and eventually even the best of friends and blood relations have nothing to talk about when they lose common experiences together.  I chose to play this out with a dialogue between the groups, but would it be better if I set up this idea and put in some metaphors and stuff.  To me that would turn this poem more into a semi-mournful ballad deal, and I like the more frank this just is how it is feel of this poem.  I kind of like cutting to the chase in this format, but does this idea need more to support it?  Does the reader need more of a play by play point for point bit?  Obviously my poetry teachers thinks it does, but my poetry teacher also seems to think that poems need to include explanations of who Eros is and what he does.  Just trying to open it up to more views. 

Even if you don't like the poem and can't give me any kind of solid reasoning why, I'd love the comment on whether or not you think the prof's suggestions on the poem are good ones.  Any kind of comment at all would be adored.  I'm not at all sensitive to completely reworking or scrapping works.  Thanks of the looky loo.


Copyright issues... copies for educational purposes are covered under "fair use." How many copies and how much of a book is a blurry area, but a few pages for a class is definitely well-within the original meaning.

However, not knowing the book is irresponsible.
Even if the Prof can't provide the source information from where it's been copied, like an author or a title?