Poetry

>considering yourself literate without an appreciation for poetics (not the same thing as poetry)

kys get off my board

>>8843180
I'm asking you to help me understand and appreciate it

>>8843169
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poetry
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outline_of_poetry

>>8843169
A lot of poetry does have plots, etc., especially older verse. Until about a century ago, most poetry followed the rules of prose and also had a host of poetic devices and traditions to enrich it. Modern poetry can be abstract, or seem slight, but it's usually an iceberg effect, concealing multiple meanings in a fashion that's harder to do with straight prose. Some great poetry combines moving images and unforgettable lines with insight and philosophy in a fashion that no other form can touch in remotely as efficient a manner. But it does usually take work to appreciate complex poetics, so I can't just quote you a few lines and expect you to suddenly "get" it (though you might). Think of song lyrics you love, if there are any. Think of epics. Don't judge all poetry by one little aspect of the form: it is the hardest of literary arts. Here's what Eliot once said about trying to write poetry:

So here I am, in the middle way, having had twenty years—
Twenty years largely wasted, the years of l'entre deux guerres
Trying to use words, and every attempt
Is a wholly new start, and a different kind of failure
Because one has only learnt to get the better of words
For the thing one no longer has to say, or the way in which
One is no longer disposed to say it. And so each venture
Is a new beginning, a raid on the inarticulate
With shabby equipment always deteriorating
In the general mess of imprecision of feeling,
Undisciplined squads of emotion. And what there is to conquer
By strength and submission, has already been discovered
Once or twice, or several times, by men whom one cannot hope
To emulate—but there is no competition—
There is only the fight to recover what has been lost
And found and lost again and again: and now, under conditions
That seem unpropitious. But perhaps neither gain nor loss.
For us, there is only the trying. The rest is not our business.

>>8843169
I agree with you anon. Poems are pretty garbage no matter the author.

File: dudeweed.jpg (86KB, 723x653px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 723x653px

>>8843375
Damn, was Eliot the bees knees or what? You seem to like poetry. Which ones are your favorite?

File: CohenPoetry.jpg (304KB, 1200x760px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 1200x760px

>>8843403
For Modernists: Yeats, Eliot, Pound. But I like poets from most periods. Some of Cohen is fine work, Heaney, Frost, Keats, Wordsworth..

>>8843418
what a fucking entry-level pleb response

start with Arnaut Daniel

Poetry was only ever relevant when it served as the engine of the language it was written in.

Guys like Homer, Shakespeare, etc grabbed the language they spoke by the balls and pulled it to a height it had never achieved before. Everybody who used the language after them was using their phrases and their ideas.

Today, because of the massive variety of other ways of disseminating information, memes for example, poetry lacks this power and ends up being the same kind of puerile paint shittery that makes up modern art.

>>8843469
Are you saying that memes are the most relevant form of art nowadays?

I can get behind this

>>8843169
>When it comes to novels, it takes a lot of objective talent to come up with good plots, conversations, descriptions, etc
these are not strong criterion for judging the success of a novel. reading for plot, character, description and other basic structural elements is such a dull and simple-minded activity that it imposes severe limitations on the kinds of subtleties you can draw out from a text. You can't see any value in poetics because you're incapable of appreciating artistic nuances such as rhythm, lyricism, tone, imagery, allusion, repetition, formal experimentation, syntactical shape, etc etc.. Actually learn how to read before you learn how to read, know what I mean?

>>8843425
Yes, I read Daniel and the other troubadours when I saw Dante' and Eliot and Pound's high praise of them. But, in translation at least, they're not among my favourites.

File: 1-A-B.jpg (457KB, 2000x1111px) Image search: [Google]

457KB, 2000x1111px

Anyway, my "entry-level pleb response" aside, here is my poetry collection, shelf by shelf. Some poets are in other areas (medieval, etc.) but this is most of them.

File: 2-C-D.jpg (491KB, 2000x1461px) Image search: [Google]

491KB, 2000x1461px

2

File: 3-D-K.jpg (506KB, 2000x1323px) Image search: [Google]

506KB, 2000x1323px

3

File: 4-K-R.jpg (387KB, 2000x1164px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 2000x1164px

4

>>8843203
Read a book.

File: 5-S-W.jpg (586KB, 2000x1414px) Image search: [Google]

586KB, 2000x1414px

5

File: 6-Y-Anthologies.jpg (611KB, 2000x1454px) Image search: [Google]

611KB, 2000x1454px

6

File: 0-Eliot.jpg (557KB, 2000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

557KB, 2000x1500px

Some books on Eliot.

File: 7-Misc.jpg (748KB, 2000x1861px) Image search: [Google]

748KB, 2000x1861px

Some currently-unsorted poetry books.

>>8843469
It's not that it was the engine, its just that words were the only easily transmittable artform for hundreds of years. It's not until recently that visual & mixed media have gained its ease. Imagine if the proletariat of the 1700s had photocopiers - you can be sure they'd be constantly mailing each other the freshest memes.

Art succeeds not in the metaphysical realm of progress or novelty - but when it enters the common culture and becomes invisible and unnotable.

People used shakespeares phrases in the same way that we quote memorable movie lines. People wrote poetry and songs in the same way we make memes - variations on a theme, a structural parallel, a shared conceptual basis or rhythm.

Artisitic merit being a wholly different argument.

>>8843480
literature:poetry
::
visualArt:ImpactMemes
::
films:youtubehaiku
::
???:CopyPasta