[Chris O'Carroll]

Originally Posted by Nick McRae

Those who've appreciated my work the most were universally other poets, while those who weren't poets didn't really know how to read into my writing or give weak areas the benefit of the doubt. For the poets, some of my pieces were life changing, for the non-poets, some of it was too unfamiliar and foreign. Outside of their comfort zone.

My involvement with poetry has taught me that it's almost never a good idea to boast that people find my work life changing. Some of what you've posted here feels an awful lot like a grievance in search of a literary theory.

[Rose Novick]

That I'm a girl

[Nick McRae]

Originally Posted by Chris O'Carroll

My involvement with poetry has taught me that it's almost never a good idea to boast that people find my work life changing. Some of what you've posted here feels an awful lot like a grievance in search of a literary theory.

Definitely not my intent to boast or grieve, but I can see how it was read that way. I'll chalk it up to inexperience with this forum.

I hoped to give others space to post in this thread, but that doesn't seem to be happening so I'll add another post.

IMO, poetry is a unique genre in that it's pure literary expression, and a bit difficult by default. In other art forms like painting and music there isn't much demanded of the consumer, and when there is it tends to be a turn off.

But in poetry almost everything is difficult and demands that the reader show up and pay attention. This isn't something that we're particularly good at, because by and large most of us have more important things to do.

For myself as a reader of poetry, I'm more of an anthropologist than poet. I'm fascinated by how people express themselves in the form, what they say, the themes that repeat, and so on. And as a writer of poetry I've found a great deal of freedom to express myself in ways that I couldn't have done in any other form.

To me that's what makes poetry such a beautiful art form, there is a touch of divinity in it. But I think many of us have a tough time seeing the written word from that perspective. To many, any type of book is just a bunch of stale words on a page. On a good day we're usually just hoping that what we read validates our preexisting worldview, including in poetry.

I'm not angsty about that by any means, but the best experiences I've had as a poet were absolutely when I was engaging with other poets. These were usually people who had a natural appreciation of the form. Granted, I know others are out there, but admittedly I haven't looked for them very hard.

This is one of the reasons I've shown up at this forum. I'm raising a family and don't have the time to become active in my community, so this place is one of the few outlets I've found to even talk about poetry. Most of my immediate contacts just aren't that interested.

To put this in terms of the thread topic (in a more neutral way), this is all to say that, IMO, poetry is a specialist field, and maybe even something like a club.

[Jayne Osborn]

Most of my immediate contacts just aren't that interested.

Hi Nick,
I think you've hit the nail on the head there. One thing I've learned is that, generally speaking, only other poets are interested. While my family and my friends all know I write poetry, no one ever asks me what I've written lately / have I had anything published recently / are you working on a poem at the moment... etc.

My husband shows an interest and is very supportive, but we're the only ones in the house now so he has no choice but to listen when I read him something I've written!

I'm not making light of your question, far from it, but as you also say "This is one of the reasons I've showed up at this forum" I can totally relate to that. We're all "birds of a feather", and it's so good to have this community of Eratosphere so that we can share our work with others who definitely are interested in what we do.

I've learned a lot of other things too, about the actual craft of writing poetry, receiving and offering constructive criticism, and that my passion from the age of seven or eight has remained with me, and always will.

Raising a family is a full-time occupation, but I hope you'll manage to find enough time to indulge your passion too!

Jayne

[Nick McRae]

Originally Posted by Jayne Osborn

Hi Nick,
I think you've hit the nail on the head there. One thing I've learned is that, generally speaking, only other poets are interested. While my family and my friends all know I write poetry, no one ever asks me what I've written lately / have I had anything published recently / are you working on a poem at the moment... etc.

My husband shows an interest and is very supportive, but we're the only ones in the house now so he has no choice but to listen when I read him something I've written!

. My wife isn't that interested. She likes that I write, but I try not to drone on.

These days I couldn't bother her even if I wanted to. With a two and a half year old, and nine month old I've had very little time to write.

A number of my friends have been interested to know that I write poetry, and a select few have wanted to read it. But I've found better results when I leave it at that and let people come to me, rather than vice versa. Too much self-promotion leaves a bad taste in people's mouths.

[Chris O'Carroll]

Nick, Poets often weaken their work by using generalizations unsupported by specific details, or by relying on abstractions instead of concrete imagery. When you say that you as a reader enjoy "the themes that repeat" in poetry, you might not be showing us a great deal, but you are at least offering something specific about your interactions with the art. On the other hand, when you describe poetry as "pure literary expression," you are sinking in the quicksand of abstraction. The phrase is essentially meaningless. It says nothing about what distinguishes poetry from other, presumably less pure, literature such as essays, plays, novels, and short stories.

If your poems rely heavily on abstraction, that might be something you want to work on. You might find it helpful to read some of the poets you admire with special attention to the concrete images in their poems, the evocations not of intangible concepts, but of things a reader can see, hear, touch, smell, and taste.

And if child care is a major feature of your daily life, you might think about way of incorporating poetry into that routine. It's not to early in their lives for you to be reading or reciting poems to them as you bathe them, dress them, feed them, burp them, or put them to bed. You'll be enriching their lives and also affirming your connection to the art you care about.

(By the way, speaking as one with no skin in the game since I have zero talent in music or painting, I think you're way off base when you say that those arts demand less of their audiences than poetry does.)

[Nick McRae]

Originally Posted by Chris O'Carroll

Nick, Poets often weaken their work by using generalizations unsupported by specific details, or by relying on abstractions instead of concrete imagery. When you say that you as a reader enjoy "the themes that repeat" in poetry, you might not be showing us a great deal, but you are at least offering something specific about your interactions with the art. On the other hand, when you describe poetry as "pure literary expression," you are sinking in the quicksand of abstraction. The phrase is essentially meaningless. It says nothing about what distinguishes poetry from other, presumably less pure, literature such as essays, plays, novels, and short stories.

If your poems rely heavily on abstraction, that might be something you want to work on. You might find it helpful to read some of the poets you admire with special attention to the concrete images in their poems, the evocations not of intangible concepts, but of things a reader can see, hear, touch, smell, and taste.

It's interesting that you managed to touch on this without seeing my writing. This is a major critique I've gotten of my work (from a former member here).

(By the way, speaking as one with no skin in the game since I have zero talent in music or painting, I think you're way off base when you say that those arts demand less of their audiences than poetry does.)

Painting and music can, and do. But it's a lot easier to get away with passive consumption of music and visual art, than it is writing. That's more along the lines of what I was getting at.

To consume poetry you pretty much have to show up. But it's not hard to listen or view without making much of an effort.

[Christine P'legion]

Originally Posted by Nick McRae

I'm curious what you've learned from being a poet. Not necessarily about writing poetry itself, but it could be that. More generally, how the act of being a writer and engaging with the genre has affected you.

This is an interesting question. (Hopefully) without descending to the usual waffle of an Grand Artistic Statement, I think that engaging with poetry has taught me, at its most basic level, another language with which to perceive and understand the world. A lot of my poetry is an attempt to capture a very particular feeling or moment in time -- the question I'm always asking myself is "what is the essential kernel of this [whatever it is]?". And in looking for that kernel I've often found that it comes down to specificity and truth, with as much other stuff pared away as I can manage. I don't always manage well, of course. But I try.

Beyond that, on a practical level, I think it's improved my memorization abilities (I often write a poem over and over in my head long before it makes it to a page), and the whole publication process has taught me a lot about perseverance and thickened my skin.