Who is a poet?

Discussion on the works of John Keats.

Moderators: Saturn, Malia

Postby Becky » Mon Apr 18, 2005 1:32 pm

Poetry is self-expression, and so a poet is a self-expressicist.

A poetry reader, on the other hand, must exist for the friendship of poetry to exist. Just as, without a friend, a friend won't speak to be understood, without a reader, a poet will not be read or understood. People who say they write poetry for themselves alone simply feel their self-expressions are not worthy of being read, a false modesty. The pleasure of writing poetry, like the pleasure of speech, should not be confused with the pleasure of being heard and the necessity of beiing understood.
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 6:11 pm

Postby Fred » Mon Apr 18, 2005 1:41 pm

Umm I'm going to have to diagree with that,
poetry is more than self expresion. And somtimes its like somthing very private and to alot of people somthing which they cannot bear to see critisied. Sort of like a diary. so actually I think there are 2 types of poetry as poetry.
1 Poetry of a poet ie that which is written to be read by others.
2 Petry of the soul ( if you'll excuse the dramatics) that is poetry or maybe not poetry but verse would be a better word written for yourself to be read only by you.

Actually you can sort of see the differance in Keats's work.
Some of the poetry he wrote for others like things he wrote in letters and for the public is vastly differant emotion wise than the stuff he wrote and was never meant to publish.
My imagination is a monastery, and I am its monk. You must explain my metaphors to yourself.
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 9:10 am
Location: Cloud Cuckoo land... for the time being

Postby Becky » Mon Apr 18, 2005 4:27 pm

Poetry is self-expression, its just that we shouldn't get too narrow about what we mean by that term. The 'self' can be part of a society, a minority as well as simply a personality expressing their feelings. Also, a good poem is not simply an honest expression of selfhood, but often an exploration of character, roleplay, in other words. Not to mention an exploration of self-expressive technique, ie poetic technique.

As for whether privately written poetry is poetry - of course its poetry! In my own experience, however, its a development towards being read aloud, or at least being read. Even if the actual poems you've written privately are never published, they are a springboard for more, better work, which you feel more confident about submitting.
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 6:11 pm

Postby witch6 » Wed Apr 20, 2005 9:11 am

James Joyce said that "literature is the eternal affirmation of the spirit of man". It is quite common place now, if you think about it, but it's most definitely true.

Poetry is many things: technically speaking it is music, numbers, regularity, beautiful imagery, and I think that aspect of it shouldn't be underestimated; but I believe poetry might be looked at as an unprecedented, original perspective on the world. Every poet looks around him/herself and translates what he/she sees into verse, but not just for his/her own benefit. Rather than the expression of the self, I think it is the expression of what is universal to everyone, to human kind.

Keats once wrote that it was his duty as a poet to give voice to those who couldn't express themselves...maybe that's just what poetry is: a voice for the voiceless.

Sorry...it's quite an inconstistent explanation...I have thrown all sorts of hypotheses in there...hope some of it made sense :)
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 12:08 pm

How many of you take to time to read....

Postby MonroeDoctrine » Thu Apr 21, 2005 1:27 am

How many of you have taken the time to read Shelly's In Defense of Poetry? The piece is short and outlines a damn good sense of what poetry is; I recommend reading it!
User avatar
At Parnassus' foot
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 8:11 am

Postby Despondence » Thu Apr 21, 2005 5:05 am

I must say, overall, I didn't like it so much. While expertly argued by Shelley, I felt it sometimes overly analytical in the abstract, reminding me of some modern new age philosphers (Ken Wilber comes to mind). It somehow feels wrong that a poet should have to turn to a completely different language in order to rationalize the other, the mundane and the humane. Poetry defends itself, IMHO. But the "Defense.." still an interesting read, I guess, if you're inclied to that sort of stuff. Somehow I'm not surprised to hear our dear fanatic MoroneDoctrine recommending this piece.. :wink:

Why you're ignorant

Postby MonroeDoctrine » Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:04 am

The fact is that In Defense of Poetry outlines how real poetry has actually functioned in our human civilization. It also makes clear who are the real poets; the best way to understand what Shelly is writing about is to read the greatest poets such as Dante Aligeri.
User avatar
At Parnassus' foot
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 8:11 am

Postby Endymion » Fri May 13, 2005 3:06 pm

"little epiphanies—everyone has them, but poets write them down"
- Alden Nowlan
"He Stood in His Shoes and he Wondered
He Wondered
He Stood in his Shoes and He Wondered."
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2002 4:03 pm
Location: London, UK

Postby Despondence » Mon May 16, 2005 12:41 am

Blast from the past.....Endymion lives!

Endymion wrote:"little epiphanies—everyone has them, but poets write them down"

I'd rather say the philosopher writes them down - the poet writes how he feels about it.

Postby Endymion » Tue May 17, 2005 3:48 pm

<<Yawns loudly>> oh, sorry. I must've dozed off there for a while. ;)
"He Stood in His Shoes and he Wondered
He Wondered
He Stood in his Shoes and He Wondered."
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2002 4:03 pm
Location: London, UK

Down Where the Dream Woman Dwells

Postby regwhite » Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:24 pm

Most poets aren’t.
Their poems neither.
“the bigness of their littleness”
Makes her laugh
At – not with – them.

The Muse is not amused.
Mental masturbation
Titillates the voyeur
But not her.

In quiet lonely places
She peers behind men’s faces
For their soul. Finding none –
A hollow shell, an empty hole.

Trite, boring, trivial, banal.
That bitch, having tasted better,
Tires before
He even knows she’s there.

“Ta-ta. Bye-bye.
“Size counts, little man;
“Your ego is just too big.”
And she’s gone.

Alone on cold hillside,
He plays with a phrase,
And lays it at the feet
Of vested interests.

“Is this good? Is this a poem?”
He asks his fellow would be bards.
“I’ll like yours if you like mine.
“Let’s have a beer and play some cards.”

Whence came c--t? And whither goes she?
(The White Lady dances where they can’t see.)
“If I publish you will you publish me?”
Wrong questions!

“TB or not TB?”
That is the question.
The Bard, The Belle,
Truth-Beauty consumed.

A poet is someone
who waits. And while
he waits, he readies

If he is pure,
he might see her.
He might know her,
he might love her,
until he is empty.

And this is not a poem.
Johnny, We Hardly Knew Ye
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 4:45 pm
Location: Kanuckistan

Lo and Behold

Postby MonroeDoctrine » Sat Jun 04, 2005 5:43 am

One of Mine Again!

Lo! Heed the words that move with honesty;
Most "poets" tend to lack the modesty
to respect the bards now in earth's bosom.
The past haunts the lack luster momentum
of an illiterate modern slam poet,
who deserves to get slammed and then regret
he or she attempted to make the bold
claim; I'm a poet!May poesie unfold
her geist and give guidence to these lost folk.
Read some Keats and Shelly;Read what they spoke.
User avatar
At Parnassus' foot
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 8:11 am

Postby Steen » Sat Jun 04, 2005 11:25 pm

[quote="Becky"]Poetry is self-expression, and so a poet is a self-expressicist.

Note: A self-expressicist who has a skill with the written word. I can't make poems for peanuts. I can write prose and fiction, but I can't find the skill to keep the words flowing. My attempts are all over the place. Like me I guess...but Poems arn't what do it for me. I like to write long prose, essays on feeling and love...above all things love. It fasinates me that people die for it, throw their lives away for others gladly.
Woe to me being in love with a scientist, a biology sudent to whom love is simply phamones and chemicals....chemicals can't explain the surge of joy and happyness you get when you fall on love. Mabye they can, but is seems a shallow answer, as knowing how something is done is nothing like giving in and enjoying the senseation.
You don't love a women because she is beatiful, she is beatiful because you love her.
Posts: 80
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 12:26 am
Location: Oxfordshire

Postby Matt » Sun Jun 05, 2005 9:07 pm

Much Love to Stephen. I'm here to shake things up a little. lol. Those were the days eh Stevey boy? I see that there are loads of new regulars here!

All these 'intellectual conversations' are very good and yet would no one rather discuss the 'derivation of the word c*nt?' for an evening? Keats did
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2003 5:26 pm

Postby Saturn » Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:28 pm

Oh the amount of trouble that word has caused me - when trying to log on here at work the site was blocked due to the firewall for pornography because I had used that word in a thread ages ago :roll: :roll:

Nice to see you're still there Matt :D

Are you still writing??

Have you had anything published recently??
"Oh what a misery it is to have an intellect in splints".
Forum Administrator
Posts: 4015
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 10:16 am


Return to Poems, Odes and Plays

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests