ABPA - Australian Bush Poets Association

I was reading a beautiful new art book ( Drawing Projects, Maslen & Southern 2011) from our local library and I came across this wonderful quote.

" To draw is to look, examining the structure of appearances. A drawing of a tree shows not a tree, but a tree being looked at "
John Berger.

A had one of those, eureka light bulb moments when I read that. I am sure that it applies equally true to writing a poem. To paraphrase the quote
" Poetry is to look and listen, examining the nature of the experience and relationships.
A poem shows not an experience but an experience being thought about "
my paraphrase.

It's an interesting quote, and a valid extrapolation, Neville.

There are different types of drawings though, aren't there, and different types of poems. I suppose you could say an abstract drawing does not represent the abstraction itself, but only the abstraction being thought about. But given that an abstraction only exists in the realms of thought, is there a difference between the abstraction being thought about and the abstraction itself? What about if you are thinking about the abstraction that is thought about? And does any of this get anybody anywhere?

There are abstract poems, aren't there. I could write a poem about some life form that is half plant and half animal, but given that such a thing does not exist other than in thought, there would be no difference between the thing being thought about and the thing itself.

I like to take photos of people taking photos. I could make a drawing of a person who was drawing a tree. I could write a poem about somebody who was writing a poem. Is any of this relevant? Probably not. I could also make a drawing of somebody who was writing a poem, or write a poem about somebody who was drawing a tree. I could also write a poem about my drawing of somebody who was writing a poem...or drawing a tree. I think I should stop now.

Stephen...I shudder to think what you might tell your patients when they ask for a prognosis

Well, you started it!

While I, on the other hand, (under the influence of strong pain pills)

though I cannot draw very well, may draw a picture to show what I think someone thinks about a piece of modern art, and hope that my drawing can help someone to understand what I think someone else (a third party) is thinking about the piece that neither of us have seen. And if anyone can understand what I am trying to say, let alone what the piece of art looks like, they have a sharper intellect than either I or the artist.

I have seen a sculpture, hune from a single stone, of a teardrop shape with a hole in the middle, smooth and wonderful to feel, and named 'woman reclining'. I love tactile pieces and I 'get' the inference of the hole, being a womb, but the teardrop shaped stone itself has no relation to the shape of a woman. I'm sure the artist was delighted with his/her work but I would have liked a more 'egg timer' shape myself.

I wonder if there exists somewhere a pillar with a hole in the very upper section called 'the thinker'. I'm going back to sleep now.

Marty how can you say that about my perfectly personable portrayal of Peppytweak? He had the face of a lamb - almost

Neville and Stephen - were one to write a poem about

I see you, watching me watching you watching me,
and I note you sketch a picture on your page
of an eye watching I, watching. Aye I know you see
and I see you're all at sea. Now I'm dismayed.

then I wonder what illustration would come from that - NB to self - subject for art class.

I will let you know and maybe let you see

Zondrae did you mean hewn or hung from a piece of stone?

The teardrop shape I would think relates very well to a woman -being that a woman is considered to often be full of tears and tearful...and with bloody good reason IMO.

I never saw The Silence of the Lambs because I thought it a silly title - anyone knows Lambs are never silent unless they are asleep - I did see Babe and even though I don't like pigs I enjoyed that movie Marty.

Did anybody see 'The Silence of the Pigs'?

I thought that the art quote was a great insight.
It's nothing to do with abstract concepts, quite the opposite, it's to do with reality and truth.

It's disappointing if our bush poets don't find it interesting or useful. I would have thought that people who are interested in writing poetry would be eager to think about a principle of effective writing.

There's a big difference in writing a verse or poem which simply describes in mundane language what is there for everyone to see or hear, and on the other hand, the poem or verse which describes in vivid terms what is there, but also describes in powerful emotive language how what was seen or heard affected the poet when she saw or heard it, and also persuades people to see and hear what they may not have seen or heard before.

Marty Boyce, I think it was, who made the remark to the effect that the way to respond to critics of bush poetry is to do our poetry to a high standard. I think insights like the above are what we need to grasp if we are to achieve high standards.

I don't know how we are to achieve high standards if we can't stick to a thread like that for too long before we just quickly wander off into something entirely irrelevent.

This section is General POETRY discussion after all.