alien wrote on Jan 1^st, 1970 at 12:00am:

Alien-

Just as there are many different definitions for a lot of terms/words, I believe that it is possible to come up with a set of self-contained, self-consistent connotataive and denotative definitions for poetry, poem, poetic, etc. While they may not work in all circumstances, I do believe that they can work in many (if not most) circumstances. After all, there must be one-or-more common denominators for such terms, otherwise we could never agree if something is a poem, nor could we even recognize what—to each of us as individauls—is a poem...much less write one.

Like I said, if nothing else, attempting to come up with such definitions would force each of us to take a step back and engage in introspection to try to understand who we each are poetically.

-Martin

alien wrote on Jan 1^st, 1970 at 12:00am:


Interesting commentary, Alien. But why shy away from “putting a stake in the ground” by offering your definition?

And while I’m at it, let me be a bit more pointed:

There are tons of definitions of poetry, but they all seem to be very personal and subjective. In a word, they’re “connotative.” And that’s fine. But virtually every “meaning” of a word, term, or concept has two parts: a “connotative” (i.e., subjective) part and a “denotative” (i.e., objective) part. Care to tackle both parts? (Does anyone care to tackle this?)

-Martin

Hi Martin,   
   
interesting question.   
   
Here's what some others have to say...   
   
What Is Poetry? 
   
excerpt from poetry-today.com
 
Poetry is a way of expressing feelings in vivid and interesting ways; good poetry says something that people remember and think about-it captures something of the essence of life in words.  At some time or another, most people are poets.   Everyone naturally responds to rhythm in words; and at moments when they are feeling emotions strongly-the loss of a friend, the dreadfulness of war or famine, the beauty of daybreak and the dawn chorus, a cup final success - the language that they use changes.   They find more imaginative and vivid ways of describing things.   
   
Good poetry-and even some less good casts a kind of spell; it says something in a vivid, memorable, true way that lives on in the mind and flourishes there.   
   
Old people, who may in other respects be forgetful and vague, can often repeat poems that they learnt 60 or 70 years ago as children; not merely parrot-fashion, but with feeling.  Children recognise the value of poetic experience naturally.   They live largely in a world of dreams, and they get to know the real world partly through their fantasies and daydreams.   The traditional nursery rhymes, as well as verse written by children, are full of violence and destruction but also show strong feelings about love and a keen response to the world around.   They have a sincerity and truth.   
   
Today people tend to use language with little feeling.   Television and cinema have tended to make us concentrate on what we see rather than what we hear. The art of natural poetry has not died.   Although many pop songs and songs from musicals are pretty awful and lacking in imagination, some of the best are excellent modern poetry. One of the functions of the poet is to draw our attention to things to which the rest of us are blind, or of which we are only vaguely aware.   His/her thoughts and feelings and observations may not be more vivid than ours; but he/she has the clarity of mind and command of language that can trap them and make them live for us and through us.   

an excerpt from this site says...
   
Poetry is a form of literature, spoken or written, that emphasizes rhythm, other intricate patterns of sound and imagery, and the many possible ways that words can suggest meaning. The word itself derives from a Greek word, poesis, meaning “making” or “creating.” Whereas ordinary speech and writing, called prose, are organized in sentences and paragraphs, poetry in its simplest definition is organized in units called lines as well as in sentences, and often in stanzas, which are the paragraphs of poetry. The way a line of poetry is structured can be considered a kind of garment that shapes and clothes the thought within it. The oldest and most longstanding genres for classifying poetry are , a long narrative poem centered around a national hero, and , a short poem expressing intense emotion.   
   
   
Throughout its long history poetry has relied on evolving rules about what a poem is, with new kinds of poetry building on earlier kinds to create greater possibilities of expression. In the 20th century poets have increasingly used the language of everyday speech and created new forms that break the usual rules of poetry, such as its organization in line units. Yet to surprise a reader and evoke a response, the new has to be seen in contrast to the old, and so poetry still depends upon a reader's depth of knowledge about the poetic practices of the past for its effectiveness. Though much poetry is in written form, it usually represents a speaking voice that is not the same as the poet's. In some lyric poems, this voice seems to speak about individual feelings; in epic poems, the voice seems to speak on behalf of a nation or community. Poetic voices of all kinds confront the unspeakable and push the limits of language and experience. The 20th-century American poet Michael Palmer characterizes this aspect of poetry when he writes playfully, “How lovely the unspeakable must be. You have only to say it and it tells a story.” At its deepest level, poetry attempts to communicate unspeakable aspects of human experience, through the still evolving traditions of an ancient and passionate art.   
   
   
Poets throughout the ages have defined their art, devised rules for its creation, and written manifestos announcing their radical changes, only to have another poet alter their definition, if not declare just the opposite. “Poetry is the purification of the language of the tribe,” wrote French poet Stéphane Mallarmé at the end of the 19th century. But 20th-century American poet William Carlos Williams, just 50 years later, would call for poems written in a language so natural “that cats and dogs can understand.” Increasingly during the 20th century, poetic language has reflected a response to severe and agonizing circumstances. Romanian-born poet Paul Celan, whose parents were killed in a concentration camp during World War II (1939-1945) and who was himself imprisoned in a work camp, wrote in German, which he viewed as the language of his Nazi tormentors. Much of the difficulty of Celan's complex, mysterious poems comes from the tension he felt between poetry as a source of beauty and order, and the meaninglessness and violence of his experience. Writing in the language of his oppressors, he dramatized this tension by using fragments, invented words and puzzling statements.   
   
   
While most poets face circumstances far less extreme than Celan's, other 20th-century writers have also struggled with the many associations language already carries with it. One experimental group, well represented among American and Canadian poets, known as Language poets, seeks to free the word from what they consider to be the constraints of the grammatical sentence, a task they view as a political action against Western culture. While most poets do not criticize language to this extent, many face new challenges in attempting to make the language of poetry reflect the speed, complexity, and confusion of late 20th-century life.   
   
Then there's this  
and    this 
or even  this.   
   
I think I know the discussion to which you refer, Martin.  I often browse many poetry boards in an effort to better myself, and if the discussion is the one I'm thinking of, then indeed, it was but one of many heated discussions to be found across many poetry boards.   
   
Why do these discussions get heated?   
   
I think it's because we sometimes fail to recognise a common courtesy to others in allowing them their opinion AND, like most other things in life, we, as individuals, are often passionate about something and we tend to maybe become a bit defensive about that something.   
   
There are many definitions, it's true; no one definition I think can be said to be more correct or more definitive than the other.  Poetry, just like sculpting, literature or photography, is a subjective pursuit and is therefore going to be perceived differently by lots of people.   
   
My definition of "what is poetry?"   
   
I won't offer a definition.  It's something I do because I enjoy it.  Like many other things in life, I feel a certain responsibility (and indeed a curiosity and willingness) to learn the basic rules of the game before I look at whether or not I can bend or break the rules (or guidelines or suggestions).   
   
   
I haven't decided yet if any one of the many offered definitions is better than the other or if it could be looked at as an amalgamation of them all.  I do enjoy discussions (on many subjects and at many levels) but I have no desire really, to offer (and perhaps defend) my opinion on the subject because it is, after all, just my opinion, and I'd rather spend my time writing it to the best of my abilities and discovering how much (or at times, how little) I really know.    
   
I started learning on the day I was born and I will still be learning on the day I die - poetry is such a dynamic subject that changes with the times, and I know I will never learn all there is to know about it, but for me, the challenge is in the effort I make to understand it.   
   
Thanks for an interesting thread, Martin.   
   
Take care.   
   
alien   

Mary’s Lyrics ~ The Great Debate! thread prompted me to start this thread.

As many of you know, I don’t “do” free verse (at least, not yet). Quite frankly, I tend to agree with Robert Frost: “For my pleasure I had as soon write free verse as play tennis with the net down.”

But is “free verse” poetry?

Listen to a recital of Whitman’s free verse Out of the Cradle Endlessly Rocking. Is it poetry? I think so. Do you?

This seems to lead to a very basic question: Exactly what is poetry?

How about sharing your personal definition of “poetry?” I think that by consciously articulating what we each feels makes a poem a poem, we might be able to go a long way towards eliminating criticisms and arguments based upon each other’s own unstated—perhaps even unconscious—perceptions and preferences. If nothing else, it would force each of us to take a step back and engage in introspection to try to understand who we are poetically. (But be forewarned: I began a thread like this elsewhere, and it generated a rather “heated discussion.”) 

-Martin