ABPA - Australian Bush Poets Association

After reading the new heading for this forum, it seemed too good an opportunity to miss even though you've got rid of the OLD word now.
(the devil made me write this)

Changelings

So you want to change Bush Poetry to something modern so you say
And I wonder what’s acceptable, now, to the modernist today
Are we heading down the track of Free Verse, with its foot now in the door?
Do we chase the Brandis dollars here, by changing ideals ever more?

Will we all be intellectuals, in this brave new world you seek;
will the oldies now accept here that their futures looking bleak.
Well I’ve news for you young whipper snappers – ready for a fight,
as the Ghost’s of Henry and the Banjo strike with all their might.

© T.E. Piggott

I don't think that you need to fear the barbarians at the gates Terry.

Change is inevitable because the English language changes. Even Banjo changed things , if you read Emily Barton's poem In Memorium, you can see straight away that the way she used language for her poetry was not the same as the way her son Andrew Barton Paterson used it for his.

That's how is should be, that's how it must be, because language is a living thing, it doesn't stay the same.
Latin is called a dead language, not because it isn't used, it is still used, but because it doesn't change any more.
The Latin used today is the same as Latin used by mediaeval monks. But the English of Geoffrey Chaucer is hardly recognisable as English these days. Given enough time, the English we use will not be recognisable down the track. Bob Pacey has alluded to this already on his piece about changing word meanings. We can't stop that sort of change.

As far as form is concerned. Chaucer's English needs a translator but his rhyme and metre is easily seen. I think that the traditional forms will survive in the bush poetry, but in my unintellectual opinion it should adjust to the language of today. And it does.

My little poetry group in Singleton did a performance gig recently and one person who came, told me that she was in a bit of trepidation because she thought it was going to resemble Shakespeare. She was surprised and delighted that bush poetry speaks about to-days experiences in to-days language. That's all a "modernist" can hope to aspire to, I think.

We won't be murdered in our beds by free verse radicals Terry. Stay safe mate.

Hi Neville,

Perhaps I should have posted this in the jokes section, if we still have it.

I'd hope you'd guess that I was just being mischievous and I don't really care what people do or say.
Whatever rocks your boat as they say.

Interesting though that if any remark is made, even in jest, that appears to cast aspersions on what we now call modern thinking, it tends to put some on the defensive. Yet those who think otherwise feel free to constantly preach their message.
As I've said before, I honestly have no axe to grind on any form of writing including Free Verse, if that's your thing.

I know I write a lot of what you'd no doubt call old style poetry, because I enjoy writing it. But at the same time I also enjoy reading a wide variety of poetry both modern and in some cases quite ancient.

Speaking of Latin, long ago in my pre-sinful days, I was a head Alter Boy when the Mass was still said in Latin - still remember a lot of it.

I think I'd better give up my attempts at humor.

Cheers Terry

Fear not Terry - there will always be those who love Bush Poetry, and who consider rhyming poetry the 'only' real poetry. It has stood the test of time over hundreds of years and Banjo and Henry are part of our 'Australian- ness' with even the most poetically uneducated people in Oz being at least aware of their work.

In Defence of the "Bush"
(oops, sorry Banjo and Henry)
(c) Shelley Hansen 2015

Well, I've thought about this Terry, and you have a point, no doubt -
should we stick with rhyming verses, or just chuck the whole lot out?
It's become the latest fashion to expel one's inner spleen
with a scant regard for structure, rhyme or rhythm - it would seem.

Now, there's nothing wrong with free verse if it's written very well -
it can stimulate the senses, from another aspect tell
of the wonders of this country in descriptive flowered phrase -
or with brevity can capture visions of the poet's gaze.

But there's nothing that will equal (if I may be very bold)
the traditions of bush poetry when tales are being told.
For we can't imagine Clancy with a lack of rhyming verse,
or a haiku-styled Bush Christening! (I'm sure that would be terse!)

And would Andy with his cattle have explored their droving course
if there'd been no rhyme or rhythm to match paces with his horse?
And if Henry'd written free verse - it would be quite incomplete
and perhaps much more discordant for the Faces in the Street!

Now it's true the years have moved along and these are modern times
and the issues that we face today may feature in our rhymes,
but I'm sure this grand tradition of bush poetry will stand
for as long as poets keep alive the splendour of this land!

Well done Shelley

I suppose the point I was making, if there was one - be a free spirit, write what you like when you like.

But as I said it was just poking fun at the original new heading of this forum (especially the old bit - nothing else)

Cheers Terry

Shelley, isn't that what they call, back to the future.

Thanks Terry - and yes, I did get the point that your verse was firmly "tongue in cheek". I just couldn't resist penning a bit of doggerel!!

Cheers, Shelley

Very well said Shelley! Rhyming verse is my passion, and I'll always do my best to ensure that it does indeed 'ever stand' as you say!

Of course this is not to say I'm not open to all styles of writing and good free verse as well (good being the operative word!) Sometimes though, there is no getting around the fact that a lot of it seems to come across like cryptic garbage. Many years ago, Peter Moltoni wrote the following, so I just thought I'd share it here:

Call to the Cupboard Poets

They smile, the learned critics
as they contemplate my lyrics
and they ponder on my ballads and my lays.
They beam with kind indulgence
scarcely lacking in effulgence—
then they damn my efforts with the faintest praise.

“The lilt and cadence catches,
and the whole is good in patches,
but whoever writes a ballad in these times?
The prosody is pure,
but it could be more obscure—
and we’re just a little sorry that it rhymes.

We note the tone is forceful,
but the mood should be remorseful
and it seems a trifle too endowed with zest.
The fashion now is mystic,
melancholic, nihilistic.
But we truly thank you for your interest.”

Well mind, you cultured muses,
for the poet’s ego bruises
rather readily when trampled on in scorn.
Beware your cultural crisis
when the dawn of reason rises
and the rhythm, rhyme and meter are reborn.

For lo! This land is cluttered
end to end with verse unuttered,
lying dormant on Australia’s dusty shelves.
The art of versifying
isn’t lost and isn’t dying—
simply spurned and stifled by your sovereign selves.

So let the cupboard poet
take his trumpet out and blow it,
for the cryptic mystic poets now abroad,
although they would disdain us,
simply fail to entertain us
and at best have left us puzzled, pained and bored.

Yes, rise! You cupboard poets—
let your modesty outgrow its
inhibitions – flaunt the product of your skill.
It’s worth it, so unearth it,
for this land has had a surfeit
of the ‘modern poet’s’ literary swill.

- Peter Moltoni, WA

I see Catherine that Mr Moltoni laments that " the poet's ego bruises , rather readily when trampled on in scorn " but this doesn't seem to stop him referring to other people's work as "the modern poets' literary swill ".

Let's hope that the modern poets don't have delicate egos that are easily bruised.