Evolution of a lyric poet (Frye)

[George Dance]

“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....

“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”

(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)

(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

[j***@aol.com]

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>

Jeanne

[Dale Houstman]

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue.
George's poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the prescriptions
he finds so alluring (partly because - to him - they remain hermetic),
but also to the lowest demands of a junior high school poetry class. And
- far more importantly - he has demonstrated time and time again an
obstinate resistance to learning, jumping on any cheap bandwagon (like
the tawdry whore hackneys trotted out by Will from time to time) which
promise to elevate his pseudo-relationship with poetry through the
diminishment of those who have a more familial connection. George is -
to put it mildly - a self-defrauding fraud.

dmh

[msifg]

Post by Dale Houstman

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue. George's
poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the prescriptions he finds
so alluring (partly because - to him - they remain hermetic), but also to
the lowest demands of a junior high school poetry class. And - far more
importantly - he has demonstrated time and time again an obstinate
resistance to learning, jumping on any cheap bandwagon (like the tawdry
whore hackneys trotted out by Will from time to time) which promise to
elevate his pseudo-relationship with poetry through the diminishment of
those who have a more familial connection. George is - to put it mildly -
a self-defrauding fraud.
dmh

george is a good guy.

you're an asshole.

case closed.

[Rob Evans]

Post by msifg

Post by Dale Houstman

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue.
George's poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the prescriptions
he finds so alluring (partly because - to him - they remain hermetic),
but also to the lowest demands of a junior high school poetry class.
And - far more importantly - he has demonstrated time and time again an
obstinate resistance to learning, jumping on any cheap bandwagon (like
the tawdry whore hackneys trotted out by Will from time to time) which
promise to elevate his pseudo-relationship with poetry through the
diminishment of those who have a more familial connection. George is - to
put it mildly - a self-defrauding fraud.
dmh

george is a good guy.
you're an asshole.
case closed.

A detailed refutation indeed - one line ffom each of your brain cells.

Rob
--
Rob Evans
-----------
When I see a swine,
I reach for 45-calibre pearls
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

[George Dance]

Post by Rob Evans

Post by msifg

Post by Dale Houstman

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue.
George's poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the prescriptions
he finds so alluring (partly because - to him - they remain hermetic),
but also to the lowest demands of a junior high school poetry class.
And - far more importantly - he has demonstrated time and time again an
obstinate resistance to learning, jumping on any cheap bandwagon (like
the tawdry whore hackneys trotted out by Will from time to time) which
promise to elevate his pseudo-relationship with poetry through the
diminishment of those who have a more familial connection. George is - to
put it mildly - a self-defrauding fraud.
dmh

george is a good guy.
you're an asshole.
case closed.

A detailed refutation indeed

Perfect in that respect; it said all that was needed, with almost no
excess verbiage. Dale could learn a lot about editing his flames from
msifg.

Instead of whining about it, Dale should be glad-ass happy he managed
to troll one response.

[Karla]

Post by George Dance

Post by Rob Evans

Post by msifg

Post by Dale Houstman

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue.
George's poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the prescriptions
he finds so alluring (partly because - to him - they remain hermetic),
but also to the lowest demands of a junior high school poetry class.
And - far more importantly - he has demonstrated time and time again an
obstinate resistance to learning, jumping on any cheap bandwagon (like
the tawdry whore hackneys trotted out by Will from time to time) which
promise to elevate his pseudo-relationship with poetry through the
diminishment of those who have a more familial connection. George is - to
put it mildly - a self-defrauding fraud.
dmh

george is a good guy.
you're an asshole.
case closed.

A detailed refutation indeed

Perfect in that respect; it said all that was needed, with almost no
excess verbiage. Dale could learn a lot about editing his flames from
msifg.
Instead of whining about it, Dale should be glad-ass happy he managed
to troll one response.- Hide quoted text -

I don't know if I'm getting trolled or not, but I do want to know what
being a good guy (or gal) or being an asshole has to do with writing
good poetry?

Karla

[George Dance]

Post by Karla

Post by George Dance

Post by Rob Evans

Post by msifg

Post by Dale Houstman

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue.
George's poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the prescriptions
he finds so alluring (partly because - to him - they remain hermetic),
but also to the lowest demands of a junior high school poetry class.
And - far more importantly - he has demonstrated time and time again an
obstinate resistance to learning, jumping on any cheap bandwagon (like
the tawdry whore hackneys trotted out by Will from time to time) which
promise to elevate his pseudo-relationship with poetry through the
diminishment of those who have a more familial connection. George is - to
put it mildly - a self-defrauding fraud.
dmh

george is a good guy.
you're an asshole.
case closed.

A detailed refutation indeed

Perfect in that respect; it said all that was needed, with almost no
excess verbiage. Dale could learn a lot about editing his flames from
msifg.
Instead of whining about it, Dale should be glad-ass happy he managed
to troll one response.- Hide quoted text -

I don't know if I'm getting trolled or not,

Have you been referrred to in the thread? If not, then probably not.

Post by Karla
but I do want to know what
being a good guy (or gal) or being an asshole has to do with writing
good poetry?

That's an interesting topic to raise. Offhand I don't see any obvious
connection. It looks like a question that would need empirical
research if one wants an answer that's more than merely speculative.

One could argue that someone who can't write any good poetry is more
likely to become bitter and therefore more likely to act like an
asshole. One could argue that someone who consistently writes good
poetry is more likely to become arrogant and more likely to act like
an asshole. Another could argue that a non-asshole is more likely to
learn from others, and therefore more likely to write good poetry.
Another could argue that someone incapable of writing good poetry is
more likely to want to acquire the skill from others and therefore not
be an asshole. In the absence of empirical facts, there's no reason to
prefer any one hypothesis to any other.

[Karla]

Post by George Dance

Post by Karla

Post by George Dance

Post by Rob Evans

Post by msifg

Post by Dale Houstman

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue.
George's poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the prescriptions
he finds so alluring (partly because - to him - they remain hermetic),
but also to the lowest demands of a junior high school poetry class.
And - far more importantly - he has demonstrated time and time again an
obstinate resistance to learning, jumping on any cheap bandwagon (like
the tawdry whore hackneys trotted out by Will from time to time) which
promise to elevate his pseudo-relationship with poetry through the
diminishment of those who have a more familial connection. George is - to
put it mildly - a self-defrauding fraud.
dmh

george is a good guy.
you're an asshole.
case closed.

A detailed refutation indeed

Perfect in that respect; it said all that was needed, with almost no
excess verbiage. Dale could learn a lot about editing his flames from
msifg.
Instead of whining about it, Dale should be glad-ass happy he managed
to troll one response.- Hide quoted text -

I don't know if I'm getting trolled or not,

Have you been referrred to in the thread? If not, then probably not.

Perhaps your understanding of getting trolled is different than mine?
I'm thinking along the lines of fishing and taking the bait.

Post by George Dance

Post by Karla
but I do want to know what
being a good guy (or gal) or being an asshole has to do with writing
good poetry?

That's an interesting topic to raise. Offhand I don't see any obvious
connection. It looks like a question that would need empirical
research if one wants an answer that's more than merely speculative.
One could argue that someone who can't write any good poetry is more
likely to become bitter and therefore more likely to act like an
asshole. One could argue that someone who consistently writes good
poetry is more likely to become arrogant and more likely to act like
an asshole. Another could argue that a non-asshole is more likely to
learn from others, and therefore more likely to write good poetry.
Another could argue that someone incapable of writing good poetry is
more likely to want to acquire the skill from others and therefore not
be an asshole. In the absence of empirical facts, there's no reason to
prefer any one hypothesis to any other.

There you go again, trying to sound philosophical! Empirical facts?
Did you mean to write empirical data?

Karla

[George Dance]

Post by Karla

Post by George Dance

Post by Karla

Post by George Dance

Post by Rob Evans

Post by msifg

Post by Dale Houstman

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue.
George's poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the prescriptions
he finds so alluring (partly because - to him - they remain hermetic),
but also to the lowest demands of a junior high school poetry class.
And - far more importantly - he has demonstrated time and time again an
obstinate resistance to learning, jumping on any cheap bandwagon (like
the tawdry whore hackneys trotted out by Will from time to time) which
promise to elevate his pseudo-relationship with poetry through the
diminishment of those who have a more familial connection. George is - to
put it mildly - a self-defrauding fraud.
dmh

george is a good guy.
you're an asshole.
case closed.

A detailed refutation indeed

Perfect in that respect; it said all that was needed, with almost no
excess verbiage. Dale could learn a lot about editing his flames from
msifg.
Instead of whining about it, Dale should be glad-ass happy he managed
to troll one response.- Hide quoted text -

I don't know if I'm getting trolled or not,

Have you been referrred to in the thread? If not, then probably not.

Perhaps your understanding of getting trolled is different than mine?
I'm thinking along the lines of fishing and taking the bait.

That sounds good to me. Trolling is writing something inflammatory, as
bait to get someone else to respond. Judging a post to be a troll is
not the same as judging who's being trolled; for that, one would have
to look and see if there's a name on the bait.

Post by Karla

Post by George Dance

Post by Karla
but I do want to know what
being a good guy (or gal) or being an asshole has to do with writing
good poetry?

That's an interesting topic to raise. Offhand I don't see any obvious
connection. It looks like a question that would need empirical
research if one wants an answer that's more than merely speculative.
One could argue that someone who can't write any good poetry is more
likely to become bitter and therefore more likely to act like an
asshole. One could argue that someone who consistently writes good
poetry is more likely to become arrogant and more likely to act like
an asshole. Another could argue that a non-asshole is more likely to
learn from others, and therefore more likely to write good poetry.
Another could argue that someone incapable of writing good poetry is
more likely to want to acquire the skill from others and therefore not
be an asshole. In the absence of empirical facts, there's no reason to
prefer any one hypothesis to any other.

There you go again, trying to sound philosophical!

I spent some time thinking about how to answer your question before
writing a reply. Maybe that's why.

It certainly strikes me as a philosophical question, one without any
non-controversial answer.

Post by Karla
Empirical facts?
Did you mean to write empirical data?

That's a good revision. I did mean "in the absence of having any
empirical facts"; there probably are empirical facts out there,
whether one has them or not. "Empirical data" works fine, as long as
it's understood one means "empirically factual data".

[George Dance]

Post by Karla

Post by George Dance

Post by Karla

Post by George Dance

Post by Rob Evans

Post by msifg

Post by Dale Houstman

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue.
George's poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the prescriptions
he finds so alluring (partly because - to him - they remain hermetic),
but also to the lowest demands of a junior high school poetry class.
And - far more importantly - he has demonstrated time and time again an
obstinate resistance to learning, jumping on any cheap bandwagon (like
the tawdry whore hackneys trotted out by Will from time to time) which
promise to elevate his pseudo-relationship with poetry through the
diminishment of those who have a more familial connection. George is - to
put it mildly - a self-defrauding fraud.
dmh

george is a good guy.
you're an asshole.
case closed.

A detailed refutation indeed

Perfect in that respect; it said all that was needed, with almost no
excess verbiage. Dale could learn a lot about editing his flames from
msifg.
Instead of whining about it, Dale should be glad-ass happy he managed
to troll one response.- Hide quoted text -

I don't know if I'm getting trolled or not,

Have you been referrred to in the thread? If not, then probably not.

Perhaps your understanding of getting trolled is different than mine?
I'm thinking along the lines of fishing and taking the bait.

Post by George Dance

Post by Karla
but I do want to know what
being a good guy (or gal) or being an asshole has to do with writing
good poetry?

That's an interesting topic to raise. Offhand I don't see any obvious
connection. It looks like a question that would need empirical
research if one wants an answer that's more than merely speculative.
One could argue that someone who can't write any good poetry is more
likely to become bitter and therefore more likely to act like an
asshole. One could argue that someone who consistently writes good
poetry is more likely to become arrogant and more likely to act like
an asshole. Another could argue that a non-asshole is more likely to
learn from others, and therefore more likely to write good poetry.
Another could argue that someone incapable of writing good poetry is
more likely to want to acquire the skill from others and therefore not
be an asshole. In the absence of empirical facts, there's no reason to
prefer any one hypothesis to any other.

There you go again, trying to sound philosophical! Empirical facts?
Did you mean to write empirical data?

I'm still trying to understand your complaints here, Karla. My most
charitable explanation is that you were hoping to get a quick answer
and move on to make a point.

So let's do that, by changing your question to one that gives us a
quick answer, such as:
"Does anyone know what being a good guy (or gal) or being an asshole
has to do with writing
good poetry?"

I'd answer that quickly and easily. No, we don't.

Does that allow us to move on?

[Richard Oakley]

Post by George Dance

Post by Karla

Post by George Dance

Post by Rob Evans

Post by msifg

Post by Dale Houstman

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue.
George's poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the prescriptions
he finds so alluring (partly because - to him - they remain hermetic),
but also to the lowest demands of a junior high school poetry class.
And - far more importantly - he has demonstrated time and time again an
obstinate resistance to learning, jumping on any cheap bandwagon (like
the tawdry whore hackneys trotted out by Will from time to time) which
promise to elevate his pseudo-relationship with poetry through the
diminishment of those who have a more familial connection. George is - to
put it mildly - a self-defrauding fraud.
dmh

george is a good guy.
you're an asshole.
case closed.

A detailed refutation indeed

Perfect in that respect; it said all that was needed, with almost no
excess verbiage. Dale could learn a lot about editing his flames from
msifg.
Instead of whining about it, Dale should be glad-ass happy he managed
to troll one response.- Hide quoted text -

I don't know if I'm getting trolled or not,

Have you been referrred to in the thread? If not, then probably not.

Post by Karla
but I do want to know what
being a good guy (or gal) or being an asshole has to do with writing
good poetry?

That's an interesting topic to raise. Offhand I don't see any obvious
connection. It looks like a question that would need empirical
research if one wants an answer that's more than merely speculative.
One could argue that someone who can't write any good poetry is more
likely to become bitter and therefore more likely to act like an
asshole. One could argue that someone who consistently writes good
poetry is more likely to become arrogant and more likely to act like
an asshole. Another could argue that a non-asshole is more likely to
learn from others, and therefore more likely to write good poetry.
Another could argue that someone incapable of writing good poetry is
more likely to want to acquire the skill from others and therefore not
be an asshole. In the absence of empirical facts, there's no reason to
prefer any one hypothesis to any other.

one could say an asshole will bean asshole, but perhaps assholiness is. a purely, personal view. A dark personal view, for I doubt anyone, this side of proctology wants much to do with assholes.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Richard Oakley

Post by George Dance

Post by Karla

Post by George Dance

Post by Rob Evans

Post by msifg

Post by Dale Houstman

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue.
George's poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the prescriptions
he finds so alluring (partly because - to him - they remain hermetic),
but also to the lowest demands of a junior high school poetry class.
And - far more importantly - he has demonstrated time and time again an
obstinate resistance to learning, jumping on any cheap bandwagon (like
the tawdry whore hackneys trotted out by Will from time to time) which
promise to elevate his pseudo-relationship with poetry through the
diminishment of those who have a more familial connection. George is - to
put it mildly - a self-defrauding fraud.
dmh

george is a good guy.
you're an asshole.
case closed.

A detailed refutation indeed

Perfect in that respect; it said all that was needed, with almost no
excess verbiage. Dale could learn a lot about editing his flames from
msifg.
Instead of whining about it, Dale should be glad-ass happy he managed
to troll one response.- Hide quoted text -

I don't know if I'm getting trolled or not,

Have you been referrred to in the thread? If not, then probably not.

Post by Karla
but I do want to know what
being a good guy (or gal) or being an asshole has to do with writing
good poetry?

That's an interesting topic to raise. Offhand I don't see any obvious
connection. It looks like a question that would need empirical
research if one wants an answer that's more than merely speculative.
One could argue that someone who can't write any good poetry is more
likely to become bitter and therefore more likely to act like an
asshole. One could argue that someone who consistently writes good
poetry is more likely to become arrogant and more likely to act like
an asshole. Another could argue that a non-asshole is more likely to
learn from others, and therefore more likely to write good poetry.
Another could argue that someone incapable of writing good poetry is
more likely to want to acquire the skill from others and therefore not
be an asshole. In the absence of empirical facts, there's no reason to
prefer any one hypothesis to any other.

one could say an asshole will bean asshole, but perhaps assholiness is. a purely, personal view. A dark personal view, for I doubt anyone, this side of proctology wants much to do with assholes.

We have had so many here, and everywhere, that seem to thrive in the assholishness mode, though... get big enough and you might just get elected President.

:)

[Dale Houstman]

Post by msifg

Post by Dale Houstman

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue.
George's poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the
prescriptions he finds so alluring (partly because - to him - they
remain hermetic), but also to the lowest demands of a junior high
school poetry class. And - far more importantly - he has demonstrated
time and time again an obstinate resistance to learning, jumping on
any cheap bandwagon (like the tawdry whore hackneys trotted out by
Will from time to time) which promise to elevate his
pseudo-relationship with poetry through the diminishment of those who
have a more familial connection. George is - to put it mildly - a
self-defrauding fraud.
dmh

george is a good guy.
you're an asshole.
case closed.

Really? That's the best you got?! Wow! I've heard better insults from a
frozen monkey pie. But since you are possibly only capable of
understanding such constructs, let me put on my stupid hat and try...

george is a self-wounding mental patient.

you're his bed pan remover.

case cllsed.

....
Still a bit complex perhaps? I'll try again (it's hard being this
stupid - how do you maintain it, or is it natural?)


george is a asshole.

you're an asshole enthusiast.

case closed.

......

That's more like it, right?


dmh

[George Dance]

On Mar 25, 7:37 am, Dale Houstman <***@skypoint.com> wrote:

snip

Post by Dale Houstman
george is a asshole.

snip


Maybe you'd like to take a stab at answering Karla's question:

"I don't know if I'm getting trolled or not, but I do want to know
what
being a good guy (or gal) or being an asshole has to do with writing
good poetry?"

[j***@aol.com]

Post by Dale Houstman

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue.
George's poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the prescriptions
he finds so alluring (partly because - to him - they remain hermetic),
but also to the lowest demands of a junior high school poetry class. And
  - far more importantly - he has demonstrated time and time again an
obstinate resistance to learning, jumping on any cheap bandwagon (like
the tawdry whore hackneys trotted out by Will from time to time) which
promise to elevate his pseudo-relationship with poetry through the
diminishment of those who have a more familial connection. George is -
to put it mildly - a self-defrauding fraud.
dmh

Dale,

You and Frye make sense.

Did you see where kind Karla showed me how to improve my last posy?

She is one of my favorite helpers. She shows me a way.

I keep hearing Dennis say: Less!

Jeanne

[Dale Houstman]

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by Dale Houstman

Post by j***@aol.com

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Useful, George, a call to action...;>
Jeanne

All the "usefulness" however lies in Frye's text, and will never cross
over into George's life. I know you don't get involved in these things
(and more power to you), but George ONLY comes off as reasonable and
interesting when he has used other's words; words he only vaguely
comprehends and neither has the desire nor the ability to pursue.
George's poetry itself fails to measure up to not only the prescriptions
he finds so alluring (partly because - to him - they remain hermetic),
but also to the lowest demands of a junior high school poetry class. And
- far more importantly - he has demonstrated time and time again an
obstinate resistance to learning, jumping on any cheap bandwagon (like
the tawdry whore hackneys trotted out by Will from time to time) which
promise to elevate his pseudo-relationship with poetry through the
diminishment of those who have a more familial connection. George is -
to put it mildly - a self-defrauding fraud.
dmh

Dale,
You and Frye make sense.
Did you see where kind Karla showed me how to improve my last posy?

Karla not only knows something (unlike George and Will, etc) but she
also - more importantly - knows what she doesn't know - the first
prerequisite for learning (unlike George and Will, etc.)

Post by j***@aol.com
She is one of my favorite helpers. She shows me a way.

I often point, but I tend to do it when no one is looking, or a sudden
thick mist has descended from the mountains, obscuring my frantic and/or
guiding gestures.

Post by j***@aol.com
I keep hearing Dennis say: Less!

Less is more, more or less
But I want more nonetheless.
You can tread the needy path
But I took economic math:
One and one and one is three,
But that's just not enough for me.
Sure it's nice to simplify,
Lighten your load so you might fly,
But I want platinum-coated jets!
I haven't gathered enough yet...

dmh

[Will Dockery]

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Northrop Frye's criticism of Canadian poetry is focused on in the history I've been listening to, where Frye speaks of the "terror" Canadian poets had for nature, more so than poets to the south, as nature to the Canadians was seen as a powerful, often destructive force.

I thought I'd check the archives to see what we already have on Frye, who was a well admired poet in his own right.

[Richard Oakley]

Post by Will Dockery

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Northrop Frye's criticism of Canadian poetry is focused on in the history I've been listening to, where Frye speaks of the "terror" Canadian poets had for nature, more so than poets to the south, as nature to the Canadians was seen as a powerful, often destructive force.
I thought I'd check the archives to see what we already have on Frye, who was a well admired poet in his own right.

The eagle
has gone pale
in his majesty.
The bark of wolves
howles from the den
of the storm of
a thousand trees in
the cascade of river rock
that roars away
where your mountains perch
had once been.

[General Zod]

Post by George Dance
“The technical development of a lyric poet is normally from obscurity
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, his
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which are
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not his
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It is his
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above all not
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one must write
this way in an unpoetic age.....
“Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, or
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for all concerned.
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begins to
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies,
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes a
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply of
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point.”
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23)
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetry
generator. - GD].

Outstanding reading....

[Will-Dockery]

Post by George Dance
The technical development of a lyric poet is normally fro

obscurit

Post by George Dance
to simplicity. As long as he is writing primarily for himself, hi
thoughts will be rooted in private associations, image which ar
linked to ideas through his own private imagery. This is not hi
fault: he can write only what takes shape in his mind. (*) It i

hi

Post by George Dance
job to keep on writing and not get stuck at that point, above al

no

Post by George Dance
to rationalize any failure to advance by asserting that one mus

writ

Post by George Dance
this way in an unpoetic age....
Then he is likely to pass through a social, allegorical, o
metaphysical phase, an awkward and painful phase for al

concerned

Post by George Dance
Finally, a mysterious but unmistakable ring of authenticity begin

t

Post by George Dance
come into his writing, and simultaneously the texture simplifies
meaning and imagery become transparent, and the poetry becomes
pleasure instead of a duty to read. It takes a heroic supply o
talent, practice, patience, and courage to get to that point
(The Bush Garden, Northrop Frye, Anansi 1971, 22-23
(*) [This was written before the appearance of the Houstman poetr
generator. - GD]

From the archives, good one from George Dance


This is a response to the post seen at
http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=658757313#65875731