Is big beautiful ?

Discussion of any bush poetry topic.
ONLY Registered Forum Members have access to this Forum.
manfredvijars

Re: Is big beautiful ?

Post by manfredvijars » Fri Jun 08, 2012 10:39 pm

Rimeriter wrote:One would have to research THEIR various 'wants and mores', then construct a piece to suit.
No Jim, it's not the Judges 'wants and mores'. Judges are judges because they write well, understand the craft AND are prepared to guide others.
I seem to recall you praising the works of at least TWO judges here on these forums ...

Neville, Thank goodness Bush Poetry is evolving like other forms of art and literature. You can't go forward looking back (although some think they are) otherwise we'd all be writing like Barron Field 1786 - 1846 (who wrote for HIS times). We must write for ours.

Neville Briggs
Posts: 6946
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 12:08 pm
Location: Here

Re: Is big beautiful ?

Post by Neville Briggs » Sat Jun 09, 2012 8:40 am

Yes Stephen I was aware of the repeat in Frost's poem, I was just trying to make a point. ;)
I have a book of Frost's poems, I read it avidly. he was a great country ( bush ? ) poet.


I must be a bad communicator Manfred. :roll:
I only put in those examples and the sketch to illustrate a point, which was that effective and powerful poetry is about making the most of our choices of words, not building up some large body of wordiness.

I am not being an Orwellian sheep " Short poems good, long poems bad "
After all Robert Frost wrote long poems in dialogue, Shakespeare wrote entire stage plays in verse and Henry Lawson wrote things like The Lights of Cob & Co and Trooper Campbell.

I thought it was a good discussion point that in poetry ( or any art ) quality not quantity ws the ideal. But if quantity is called for, then so be it, but that's one of those hard decisions in making poetic expression, how much is too much.
I like the saying ( I forget who said it ) " More would have been superfluous, less would not have done the turn ". And how do we know ? Good question, very good question !!

On the matter of looking back. I agree and and agree with you on that.

Certainly I believe we must speak to our own times, but there is, in the past, our heritage and tradition which we build on. We can't build on nothing or try to make it all anew from scratch.
I can't see bush poets to-day wanting to sound like Barron Field or Wordsworth, I understand what you mean there. But still, in contemporary use for example, the Sestina is very popular and that is a 12th Century troubadour form. And the traditional ballad,a very ancient form so beloved of bush poets is also still used widely in other contemporary offerings as well.
So the issue of making it new is a complex issue.

Manfred, you have made the analogy of the painter's palette for our poetry language.
Just my feeble opinion, but I think it is a good approach , using your analogy, to try and use the brightest primary and glowing colours even if on a small scale rather than use the browns, sepias and ochres of dull wordiness hoping that a detailed interesting or funny story will make up for lack of the sparkle of lively language.

And I'm going on too long !!!! :o I'll finish there. Hope that makes sense. :lol:
Neville
" Prose is description, poetry is presence " Les Murray.

manfredvijars

Re: Is big beautiful ?

Post by manfredvijars » Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:10 am

YEP!! .... :D :lol:

Rimeriter

Re: Is big beautiful ?

Post by Rimeriter » Sat Jun 09, 2012 12:45 pm

Brevity is beaut, ask any Royal Australian Signalman.
But the message has to be understood.

How could the publisher know to which book he was referring ?

Neville Briggs
Posts: 6946
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 12:08 pm
Location: Here

Re: Is big beautiful ?

Post by Neville Briggs » Sat Jun 09, 2012 2:16 pm

Imagination, Jim. ;)
Neville
" Prose is description, poetry is presence " Les Murray.

Rimeriter

Re: Is big beautiful ?

Post by Rimeriter » Sat Jun 09, 2012 2:53 pm

manfredvijars wrote:
Rimeriter wrote:One would have to research THEIR various 'wants and mores', then construct a piece to suit.
I have a deal of respect for those who are prepared to take on the onerous task of judging in any form.
Therefore I do not doubt having 'complimented' or 'thanked' some of our contributors.

However, without any disrespect, I still contend that a writing which 'resonates' to an individuals taste will be smiled kindly upon in some way shape or form.

Therefore - "hooray" for all judges.(except perhaps for a few in the legal profession.)
(another topic entirely and not to be followed in our forums).

User avatar
Irene
Posts: 657
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 8:44 pm
Location: Jurien Bay. WA
Contact:

Re: Is big beautiful ?

Post by Irene » Sun Jun 10, 2012 10:41 pm

Neville - have you considered that you may have misinterpreted the judges comment?
Perhaps by 'meat' he didn't mean that it was too short, but perhaps that it didn't convey enough within the poem? (And that's no criticism of your poem - don't know what it was like.)
I believe you can have a long poem - that hasn't enough 'meat' in it - because it has too much padding/fat/superfluous content
You can also have a short poem that is all 'meat'!! Short, concise but full of info/feelings/pictures, etc.
A well-bred (constructed) chook is every bit as great and impressive as a well bred (well constructed) horse - despite the difference in size!! ;) :lol:

Personally, if I received a comment like that, I would be inclined to think that the 'content' of my poem was lacking in the judges eye, not the quantity - perhaps I hadn't painted the picture clear enough for the judge to see? Just another take on it - for what it's worth!!

Catchya
Irene
What goes around, comes around.

Neville Briggs
Posts: 6946
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 12:08 pm
Location: Here

Re: Is big beautiful ?

Post by Neville Briggs » Mon Jun 11, 2012 8:56 am

All good points Irene.
The question is, what's enough? A very hard question, and who knows the answer?


Correspondence with judges is not proper so I will just have to work it out as best I can.

Irene wrote: believe you can have a long poem - that hasn't enough 'meat' in it - because it has too much padding/fat/superfluous content
You can also have a short poem that is all 'meat'!! Short, concise but full of info/feelings/pictures, etc.
A well-bred (constructed) chook is every bit as great and impressive as a well bred (well constructed) horse - despite the difference in size!!
I agree totally with those thoughts Irene. ;) :)
and I would add that you can have a long poem that is full of power from beginning to end, and you can have a short poem that just says nothing much, so that is my point in a poetry selection one would expect to see both short and long poems getting recognition. In the bush poetry hall of fame I see lots of long verses, can't seem to find many short punchy ones. I wonder why. ( Denis Kevans is a notable exception I think )

Just my rambling thoughts. I dream of the day when I might be able to be a writer of
" punchy " lines. I might one day if I live to about 150.
Neville
" Prose is description, poetry is presence " Les Murray.

manfredvijars

Re: Is big beautiful ?

Post by manfredvijars » Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:04 am

... well Nev, you'd better get cracking, Time's running out ... :D

Neville Briggs
Posts: 6946
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 12:08 pm
Location: Here

Re: Is big beautiful ?

Post by Neville Briggs » Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:38 pm

:o :o
Neville
" Prose is description, poetry is presence " Les Murray.

Post Reply