So, here goes, spring semester content evaluation:
Best parts-
I liked that, while this class started with assignments which had explicit direction under which we were expected to create, which can help some when mind-blanks come up/to prevent every poem from being written to be about the process of writing a poem, that we also were given the freedom later in the semester/if we rejected the assignments parameters or suggested subject, to implement and further our own types of creativity. I felt that the early-on explications of others work was necessary for students to first hand learn what could be seen behind others works of art/to prepare for what could be read into one's own poetical creations. I'm not one much for formal stuff, so the list of forms I didn't like so much (though I suppose I see their importance in a comprehensively addressed intro to poetry class) as the brief time we spent with the handout telling of the different styles/schools of poetry (how they came about, central tenets, etc).
Worst parts-
There's not much I can complain about here. I wish we would've spent more time learning about the different styles/schools, because I found that to be the most interesting and thought if we'd went over that before we had to do our poetry book reviews, I'd feel that'd be helpful, but other than that...
I guess just I wish we didn't have to read our own poems aloud so much. Though that's more of a structure complaint then one involving content, I suppose.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Writer's Blog 4/13
Damn, lord, they had some crap like this on Marta buses TV for awhile. I watched it hoping for a bit of a better storyline/more trippy affair that poetry could have with image, especially entertaining for the beginning of sometimes long red-eyed bus rides, but it was just about as cheesy, especially after the first watching/once the eyes clearing kicked in. As for which is the cheesiest of these, hmm...
I guess I'd have to say the animated poem by John Ashbery, though it doesn't seem to be eliciting a response nearly such as 'wth?' as when I saw the one on Marta. The other two really aren't that bad in their intent, its just that how can you capture a movement based on spontaneity and events occurring out of freeness and finding happiness through life's randomness, and put it into a movie clip that flows through construction? Of course, then again, I suppose this begs the question on how to capture that at all without some form of construction and still have people get it, but... hmm. It's hard to criticize others doing what they do they love, and I think these all could have been worse/the video under Ferlinghetti was the least cheesy.
I guess I'd have to say the animated poem by John Ashbery, though it doesn't seem to be eliciting a response nearly such as 'wth?' as when I saw the one on Marta. The other two really aren't that bad in their intent, its just that how can you capture a movement based on spontaneity and events occurring out of freeness and finding happiness through life's randomness, and put it into a movie clip that flows through construction? Of course, then again, I suppose this begs the question on how to capture that at all without some form of construction and still have people get it, but... hmm. It's hard to criticize others doing what they do they love, and I think these all could have been worse/the video under Ferlinghetti was the least cheesy.
Writer's Blog 4/8
I want to say this says something distinct about the US's character, but I have little knowledge of foreign hunting to say this is isolated. If nothing else, I guess it's either a sign of perseverance in the face of things going seriously wrong, or ignorance because there's more danger in eating the meat then we admit--it's only a health scare or capitalist success-only time will tell- away (lol).
Also, I'm not sure if we would be having this argument if it were some dude on a private island shooting his heart out of privately owned little creatures, rather then some dude with no privacy shooting what'll probably end up as lost-its-cuteness-roadkill anyway and cooking it in a house that had to be described as containing "sepia tones of an old man's teeth" with "wallpaper as flaky and dry as an old woman's hand" for the story to be the human interest piece that it is.
I'll say one thing, it is less expected that such a thing would happen in Detroit, and while I may not have been born in the south, after living here 14 years I have yet to hear that it is a common enough view to state it as fact this is where "wild critters are considered something of a delicacy" without even the slightest consideration to write, "To some in the south as well as, apparently by this coon hunter here in michigan, some in the north as well." hmm.
Seriously, who wrote this article?! I find the subject of it admirable in many ways, but maybe the author is the statement about the US more then anything else, we grasp at straws to show our ingenuity/hard-working-ness, but then at the same time we allow our prejudices to influence us in subtle ways that undermine our supposed-belief in equal opportunity for all--maybe even I'm guilty of it, with my feeling there must be some kind of sickness associated with eating randomly gotten meat (though that may also be because I don't like meat of any kind...)
Anyways, I'm going to come full circle to say it means a lot of things about the US, and that it's probably more of a good thing that this dude gets to remain doing his thing, as long as its not hurting any person/all information about the kills are honestly given so others can make an honest choice about buying meat/goods from him.
Also, I'm not sure if we would be having this argument if it were some dude on a private island shooting his heart out of privately owned little creatures, rather then some dude with no privacy shooting what'll probably end up as lost-its-cuteness-roadkill anyway and cooking it in a house that had to be described as containing "sepia tones of an old man's teeth" with "wallpaper as flaky and dry as an old woman's hand" for the story to be the human interest piece that it is.
I'll say one thing, it is less expected that such a thing would happen in Detroit, and while I may not have been born in the south, after living here 14 years I have yet to hear that it is a common enough view to state it as fact this is where "wild critters are considered something of a delicacy" without even the slightest consideration to write, "To some in the south as well as, apparently by this coon hunter here in michigan, some in the north as well." hmm.
Seriously, who wrote this article?! I find the subject of it admirable in many ways, but maybe the author is the statement about the US more then anything else, we grasp at straws to show our ingenuity/hard-working-ness, but then at the same time we allow our prejudices to influence us in subtle ways that undermine our supposed-belief in equal opportunity for all--maybe even I'm guilty of it, with my feeling there must be some kind of sickness associated with eating randomly gotten meat (though that may also be because I don't like meat of any kind...)
Anyways, I'm going to come full circle to say it means a lot of things about the US, and that it's probably more of a good thing that this dude gets to remain doing his thing, as long as its not hurting any person/all information about the kills are honestly given so others can make an honest choice about buying meat/goods from him.
Writer's Blog 4/6
People vary in their exact symptoms/ways of dealing with depression--some find it a private battle, keeping quiet or attempting to make logical connections for what is behind the emotion (at the most frustrating time, nothing at all), while others display (self-promote?) their scars as warnings for others following down self-destructive paths or as cries for help (attention?). I jest in these parenthesis, but must admit more honestly, it's a hard thing to judge--everyone deals with things differently, and if it helps her to write about the experience, then I guess its a good thing. Maybe it just bugs me that she is trying to make herself connected to someone who she didn't even know and that she seems so nonchalant about being depressed, as if its expected of her because of her mom's suicide rather than a very unfortunate paralyzing consequence of such--though then again, maybe I am wrapped up as too many others are in our society's notion that feeling ashamed/reticent to emotionally talk over issues--or maybe I just feel that its more a sign of recovery/healthful moving on, if one is far enough removed time wise from bad events in the past to talk of them as matter-of-fact while not blocking it from ones memory, to say this is what happened, rather than having each memory upset more then necessarily called for/have everything relate back to herself and the problem that caused it--though even as I say that, I feel that undermines the true (though sometimes annoying yet hard to stop) self-obsessed character the disease provokes...
As for audiences, they are placed before finished artwork that represents tortured emotions, not before the artist while he/she was experiencing said emotion/situation. Its easy to over-romanticize 'tortured artists' when they are just thrown one in a bunch of all the same, but more difficult to recognize the downside that may interfere with the artists life of depression.
Another big reason as well is probably that most people have never had a true depressive episode, and its hard to formulate enlightening attitudes on stuff one may have little working knowledge of.
Basically, it comes down to people either trying to relate their responses which are 'reasonable' both in measurements of time and severity to those who lose meaning to what reasonable is, which is probably meant sweetly but doesn't give much comfort to someone who feels like their internally dying, or people taking signs of recovery as a reason to say "I told you, just walk it off", which show distrust in the depressed persons rationality in a way that doesn't lend proper notice to how severe it feels inside (like telling a fucking crippled person to get out of their damned wheelchair before proper physical therapy has been done, and then doubting they ever had an injury after its healed), which serves to have the backwards purpose of making the depressed to feel as that the concept of there being a difference in levels of chemicals in ones head really is in one's head (despite science showing otherwise), and is belittling, OR people walk on eggshells around one, trading an honest opinion for that which is agreeable or over-sugarcoated rather then just to the point yet still polite/non-insulting, which is insulting.
Advice for those who feel suicidal isn't much better-usually filled with "You're not alone. Everyone has problems", which misses the point, since it doesn't have to do with feeling like you're the only one who has problems/other people don't deal with the same things, but rather has to do with feeling like one is the only person unable to cope with problems with relative ease the way the rest of the world seems to--certain things may bounce easily off while others don't, and what's always most surprising to me, it can be the little/more internal things which dig in the bigger issues most--Like if it were just big things going wrong, it might be okay, because that presupposes a higher purpose being attached to life, but the little things/boredom/lack of better meaning for everyday existence makes it like, "Man, why the hell even bother with this bullshit when there's nothing day to day to make life worth living?" Not a denial that everyone has to face this, just a feeling of overwhelmedness that one is not better at facing such and an inability to get over the intense negative emotions that can come with trying. Either that or they say, "Do you want a sin on your soul?" which doesn't help those who already feel like the mental disease has tarnished such anyway.
So, maybe the look-at-us depressed people like Linda Sexton/Nicholas Hughes are needed to counterbalance the quieter ones who may channel sadness into quiet acceptance or more creative ventures--if for no other reason then to bring to light the unintended implications of "normal" peoples responses to depression, which tends to hinge on a few different types of comments [either "Oh, I was sad for a whole two weeks when my pet died, I know exactly what you feel like (though its only appropriate for you to experience the emotions no longer than I did, and my sadness didn't stop me from doing either the things that had to be done nor the things wanted to be completed)" or "Why are you happy/able to talk about things/okay today--aren't you supposed to be depressed?!", as if its something integral to being rather than an effect of unfortunate mental temperment being set off by little or big events, depending on ones genes, and/or, "How are you today?" (*wince waiting for blood to splash in face*). This doesn't really help when people learn of truly tortured artists--attitudes mostly being "Well, I'm glad something came out of that whining".
On the other hand, I'm not for a prozac nation. I think certain suffering is the only way to get to the bottom or renewal of things, that when feelings influence thought things can take on a deeper meaning, and that the product of such. I'm just not sure its a good thing when people don't remember the tragic basis of what leads to change--and that it hurts both inner and outer aspects of ones life, sometimes badly enough that it makes one wonder if its worth the amount of turmoil that ones life can turn into just for a fucking piece of art. Its hard not to wish for more practical skills sometime, because while depression most certainly is not limited to artists, at least with practical skills one could throw themselves into a work that paid regularly based on productivity rather than subjectively received creative efforts, but on the other hand, when we do live in an increasingly doped up on prescription pills that will give everyone cancer nation, its also hard to want to have deepness/trueness of emotional reaction to be drugged out so one's nothing more than a robot--and even more frustrating when one doesn't even have that option, due to allergic, physical or other reactions to many drugs out there.
I guess the solution is--one can enjoy tortured art, but its disrespectful to forget--the artist really can get hurt in it.
As for audiences, they are placed before finished artwork that represents tortured emotions, not before the artist while he/she was experiencing said emotion/situation. Its easy to over-romanticize 'tortured artists' when they are just thrown one in a bunch of all the same, but more difficult to recognize the downside that may interfere with the artists life of depression.
Another big reason as well is probably that most people have never had a true depressive episode, and its hard to formulate enlightening attitudes on stuff one may have little working knowledge of.
Basically, it comes down to people either trying to relate their responses which are 'reasonable' both in measurements of time and severity to those who lose meaning to what reasonable is, which is probably meant sweetly but doesn't give much comfort to someone who feels like their internally dying, or people taking signs of recovery as a reason to say "I told you, just walk it off", which show distrust in the depressed persons rationality in a way that doesn't lend proper notice to how severe it feels inside (like telling a fucking crippled person to get out of their damned wheelchair before proper physical therapy has been done, and then doubting they ever had an injury after its healed), which serves to have the backwards purpose of making the depressed to feel as that the concept of there being a difference in levels of chemicals in ones head really is in one's head (despite science showing otherwise), and is belittling, OR people walk on eggshells around one, trading an honest opinion for that which is agreeable or over-sugarcoated rather then just to the point yet still polite/non-insulting, which is insulting.
Advice for those who feel suicidal isn't much better-usually filled with "You're not alone. Everyone has problems", which misses the point, since it doesn't have to do with feeling like you're the only one who has problems/other people don't deal with the same things, but rather has to do with feeling like one is the only person unable to cope with problems with relative ease the way the rest of the world seems to--certain things may bounce easily off while others don't, and what's always most surprising to me, it can be the little/more internal things which dig in the bigger issues most--Like if it were just big things going wrong, it might be okay, because that presupposes a higher purpose being attached to life, but the little things/boredom/lack of better meaning for everyday existence makes it like, "Man, why the hell even bother with this bullshit when there's nothing day to day to make life worth living?" Not a denial that everyone has to face this, just a feeling of overwhelmedness that one is not better at facing such and an inability to get over the intense negative emotions that can come with trying. Either that or they say, "Do you want a sin on your soul?" which doesn't help those who already feel like the mental disease has tarnished such anyway.
So, maybe the look-at-us depressed people like Linda Sexton/Nicholas Hughes are needed to counterbalance the quieter ones who may channel sadness into quiet acceptance or more creative ventures--if for no other reason then to bring to light the unintended implications of "normal" peoples responses to depression, which tends to hinge on a few different types of comments [either "Oh, I was sad for a whole two weeks when my pet died, I know exactly what you feel like (though its only appropriate for you to experience the emotions no longer than I did, and my sadness didn't stop me from doing either the things that had to be done nor the things wanted to be completed)" or "Why are you happy/able to talk about things/okay today--aren't you supposed to be depressed?!", as if its something integral to being rather than an effect of unfortunate mental temperment being set off by little or big events, depending on ones genes, and/or, "How are you today?" (*wince waiting for blood to splash in face*). This doesn't really help when people learn of truly tortured artists--attitudes mostly being "Well, I'm glad something came out of that whining".
On the other hand, I'm not for a prozac nation. I think certain suffering is the only way to get to the bottom or renewal of things, that when feelings influence thought things can take on a deeper meaning, and that the product of such. I'm just not sure its a good thing when people don't remember the tragic basis of what leads to change--and that it hurts both inner and outer aspects of ones life, sometimes badly enough that it makes one wonder if its worth the amount of turmoil that ones life can turn into just for a fucking piece of art. Its hard not to wish for more practical skills sometime, because while depression most certainly is not limited to artists, at least with practical skills one could throw themselves into a work that paid regularly based on productivity rather than subjectively received creative efforts, but on the other hand, when we do live in an increasingly doped up on prescription pills that will give everyone cancer nation, its also hard to want to have deepness/trueness of emotional reaction to be drugged out so one's nothing more than a robot--and even more frustrating when one doesn't even have that option, due to allergic, physical or other reactions to many drugs out there.
I guess the solution is--one can enjoy tortured art, but its disrespectful to forget--the artist really can get hurt in it.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Writer's Blog 4/1
so, i've been racking my brain, but... and you can laugh at me for this, surely...
Playing mean tricks isn't nice.
I know that's obvious, but...
When I was like 5 I got suspended b/c some idiot kid poured milk over himself on a dare and then blamed it on me. And when I was in awkward early-middle school, a few boys asked me out on a dare just to laugh at me when I took them seriously. So I guess that just left a bad taste in my mouth for planning out tricks. I understand if someone under pressure does something out-of-character, and on the other hand-- I like playfulness/being playful with my friends. It's just, you can play a trick on someone without the sole purpose being 'to be mean' or to make another suffer unnecessarily.
Tricks I've planned out/played out have been more in a person-opens-up-their-fridge-to-find-their-weed-staring them in the face kind of way, or a lover-thinks-my-place-has-been-broken-into-but-then-finds-something-better kind of way; Never in a someone's-going-to-cry-over-it kind of way.
Beyond that, I guess the meanest tricks "i've" played have been more tricks others have started but that I've been privy to. And generally those have been kind of cliche, like the first/soundest person falling asleep at a party getting covered in chips/food/whatever and written all over (with pens, whip cream, w/e's in hand). I think it was the New Years before last..or maybe the one before that... that we even strung lights over this one dude, lit him up like a christmas tree and took pics without him waking up. It was pretty funny, but... I don't know if that counts as mean, since it's kind of an expected ritual that occurs. Thankfully I sleep pretty light after I've been drinking/if I'm on an unfamiliar couch/chair, though if it were reversed on me, I wouldn't be too taken aback, as long as permanent marker isn't involved/I didn't have anything important to do that day...
Playing mean tricks isn't nice.
I know that's obvious, but...
When I was like 5 I got suspended b/c some idiot kid poured milk over himself on a dare and then blamed it on me. And when I was in awkward early-middle school, a few boys asked me out on a dare just to laugh at me when I took them seriously. So I guess that just left a bad taste in my mouth for planning out tricks. I understand if someone under pressure does something out-of-character, and on the other hand-- I like playfulness/being playful with my friends. It's just, you can play a trick on someone without the sole purpose being 'to be mean' or to make another suffer unnecessarily.
Tricks I've planned out/played out have been more in a person-opens-up-their-fridge-to-find-their-weed-staring them in the face kind of way, or a lover-thinks-my-place-has-been-broken-into-but-then-finds-something-better kind of way; Never in a someone's-going-to-cry-over-it kind of way.
Beyond that, I guess the meanest tricks "i've" played have been more tricks others have started but that I've been privy to. And generally those have been kind of cliche, like the first/soundest person falling asleep at a party getting covered in chips/food/whatever and written all over (with pens, whip cream, w/e's in hand). I think it was the New Years before last..or maybe the one before that... that we even strung lights over this one dude, lit him up like a christmas tree and took pics without him waking up. It was pretty funny, but... I don't know if that counts as mean, since it's kind of an expected ritual that occurs. Thankfully I sleep pretty light after I've been drinking/if I'm on an unfamiliar couch/chair, though if it were reversed on me, I wouldn't be too taken aback, as long as permanent marker isn't involved/I didn't have anything important to do that day...
Writer's Blog 3/30
Part of me thinks it would be a high improvement to our culture if a show like this caught on but... a)I don't think there would be enough people who appreciate this kind of thing enough to vote about it. And b) even if they did, poetry's such a wonderfully subjective thing, it might just further serve to box in definitions of what-poetry-should-be in an 'objective' way, and possibly even turn personal poetry into something way more commercialized then pureness finds necessary. Though, then again, knowing the way the universe ebbs and flows and such, maybe that would cause such a backlash there would be new genres of counterculture poetry to emerge.
But once again, this is probably just fantasy for another possible world with a different past, not something that will likely again emerge here, at least not any time soon. (or at least not in a fashion that will sustain itself rather than get rejected within a few episodes.)
But once again, this is probably just fantasy for another possible world with a different past, not something that will likely again emerge here, at least not any time soon. (or at least not in a fashion that will sustain itself rather than get rejected within a few episodes.)
Writer's Blog/Journal 3/25
No, I don't like that we live in a world where men like Marvin “Popcorn” Sutton are put in places where suicide is necessary to avoid extremely unhappy circumstances. Here this dude is, just trying to pursue his dreams--isn't that 'the American dream'?--of just being a weird dude bootlegging alcohol and enjoying life, but Noooooo, the federal government has to step in (completely over money, the most petty thing to quibble over when he wasn't hurting anyone/he was just some old dude doing his thing) and ruin his party and ultimately cause his suicide. All those conservative politicians, going on about being pro-life, well how about not enforcing stupid laws that make people want to kill themselves when you take their pleasure away?
I'm still somewhat mournful over Hunter Thompson's death--but both of these suicides are understandable, at least. 'Characters' of the world are more likely to deeply feel the heat of oppression on their backs--suicide is the ultimate rejection for this gloomy world full of plots to kill freeness and creativity and force it back into 'acceptable' lines that don't threaten the central structure of society in ways the man hates.
The question always being, how much pain could they tolerate before killing themselves seemed like a better option then dealing with it? And sadly, due to the world we live in, that point has been reached quicker then it could have been if we lived in a more accommodating-to-strangeness type of world.
I guess all we can do is say, hey dude, hope you rest in peace, because those who knew you appreciated all you brought to the world before the world brought the end to you.
I'm still somewhat mournful over Hunter Thompson's death--but both of these suicides are understandable, at least. 'Characters' of the world are more likely to deeply feel the heat of oppression on their backs--suicide is the ultimate rejection for this gloomy world full of plots to kill freeness and creativity and force it back into 'acceptable' lines that don't threaten the central structure of society in ways the man hates.
The question always being, how much pain could they tolerate before killing themselves seemed like a better option then dealing with it? And sadly, due to the world we live in, that point has been reached quicker then it could have been if we lived in a more accommodating-to-strangeness type of world.
I guess all we can do is say, hey dude, hope you rest in peace, because those who knew you appreciated all you brought to the world before the world brought the end to you.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
