Join the Neopoet online poetry workshop and community to improve as a writer, meet fellow poets, and showcase your work. Sign up, submit your poetry, and get started.
Drafting, it's not just for Beer
One of the things that constantly amazes me about poetry is they way it is basically divided into two disciplines. The first discipline is reserved for folks who believe poetry is all emotion and feel modifying anything after it is set down on the page or screen to be untrue to the spirit of poetry. The other discipline consists of people who believe poetry as progressed beyond the realm of regular people and can only be understood by those smart or clever or sophisticated or whatever enough.
I don't understand either of these, especially when they overlap into some sort of post-modern "I'm too smart for you to understand my creative process" bullshit.
Art is communication,
Period.
End of sentence.
New Paragraph.
And then I look around at all the rest of things that take skill and talent and I wonder:
"Really? A sculptor trims and works and modifies. A painter re-aligns and adds and subtracts. A musician creates and composes and edits. Why then should poets be given a free pass?"
And my answer is:
"They should not."
I know I may be the minority in this attitude but I look at the people insisting that poetry is the exception and I have to say:
"The work presented is not supporting your argument."
It's not just unintentional spelling and grammar errors, it's the use of cliche and the sentence construction and the general unfocused nature of most of what gets posted as spot-created poetry. There are germs of good ideas and foundation of solid work but it really needs to be refined and edited and enhanced through more deliberate thought.
Thus the who "more than one (1) draft" thing.
I'll fall back on my teaching experience for an explanation. If someone learns something incorrectly, the only thing repetition of the action does is ingrain the wrong way. They may believe they are getting better, and they are, they are getting better at doing the wrong thing and this is really just getting better at being crappy.
Using myself as an example, I have done stickwork, bo/quarterstaff, for 33+ years. In the first 8 years I saw a lot of things and incorporated a lot that I saw, read, or discovered. And then one day I was showing a friend what I did and he mentioned "It's kinda linier." meaning that I was doing everything as if I was on a tightrope. It was a EUREAKA moment and in a year I improved my skill and effectiveness by nearly 100%. i had another one of those when I started training in Tae Kwon Do when I was in my mid 30's. I learned better stances and transitioning and my skill and effectiveness leaped ahead again.
Each time my improvement came only when I was willing to incorporate the knowledge of others into my raw talent and admit I did not know everything. Each draft of my stickwork has made it more and more effective and a joy to watch. Not coincidently, I have followed the same path with my writing.
I have always been an effective writer but it is only when I am willing to listen to outside critique that I have those Eureka moments and my skill bounds ahead.
In the long ago and far away I could only write effectively "when the mood struck me." Now I can write effectively on demand. I still have to wait for inspiration to write better than effectively but it is important to realise that inspiration is rarer than most people believe. After all, is it really new inspiration to write on the same subject over and over in a one and done fashion or is it a tacit admission that you are writing on the subject over and over because you've not put enough thought or preparation into the previous tries?
I am not suggesting everyone writes in the same manner I do, just that you realise that the chances of you defining the world of poetry are marginal, at best, so write well, not just a lot.
Some people will view this blog entry as a personal attack. These people are idiots.
I don't understand either of these, especially when they overlap into some sort of post-modern "I'm too smart for you to understand my creative process" bullshit.
Art is communication,
Period.
End of sentence.
New Paragraph.
And then I look around at all the rest of things that take skill and talent and I wonder:
"Really? A sculptor trims and works and modifies. A painter re-aligns and adds and subtracts. A musician creates and composes and edits. Why then should poets be given a free pass?"
And my answer is:
"They should not."
I know I may be the minority in this attitude but I look at the people insisting that poetry is the exception and I have to say:
"The work presented is not supporting your argument."
It's not just unintentional spelling and grammar errors, it's the use of cliche and the sentence construction and the general unfocused nature of most of what gets posted as spot-created poetry. There are germs of good ideas and foundation of solid work but it really needs to be refined and edited and enhanced through more deliberate thought.
Thus the who "more than one (1) draft" thing.
I'll fall back on my teaching experience for an explanation. If someone learns something incorrectly, the only thing repetition of the action does is ingrain the wrong way. They may believe they are getting better, and they are, they are getting better at doing the wrong thing and this is really just getting better at being crappy.
Using myself as an example, I have done stickwork, bo/quarterstaff, for 33+ years. In the first 8 years I saw a lot of things and incorporated a lot that I saw, read, or discovered. And then one day I was showing a friend what I did and he mentioned "It's kinda linier." meaning that I was doing everything as if I was on a tightrope. It was a EUREAKA moment and in a year I improved my skill and effectiveness by nearly 100%. i had another one of those when I started training in Tae Kwon Do when I was in my mid 30's. I learned better stances and transitioning and my skill and effectiveness leaped ahead again.
Each time my improvement came only when I was willing to incorporate the knowledge of others into my raw talent and admit I did not know everything. Each draft of my stickwork has made it more and more effective and a joy to watch. Not coincidently, I have followed the same path with my writing.
I have always been an effective writer but it is only when I am willing to listen to outside critique that I have those Eureka moments and my skill bounds ahead.
In the long ago and far away I could only write effectively "when the mood struck me." Now I can write effectively on demand. I still have to wait for inspiration to write better than effectively but it is important to realise that inspiration is rarer than most people believe. After all, is it really new inspiration to write on the same subject over and over in a one and done fashion or is it a tacit admission that you are writing on the subject over and over because you've not put enough thought or preparation into the previous tries?
I am not suggesting everyone writes in the same manner I do, just that you realise that the chances of you defining the world of poetry are marginal, at best, so write well, not just a lot.
Some people will view this blog entry as a personal attack. These people are idiots.