03-23-2015, 06:34 AM
(03-23-2015, 05:19 AM)ellajam Wrote: I think there is a difference between being unclear and coming into clarity in an interesting way. What is being said doesn't have to be said blatantly if the reader is led to a clear place. That clear place may even be different for different readers, but what is written should be whole enough to have an impact.true. And I think my objection was based on this difference between being and becoming. I am not anti-clarity, but to say that something should BE clear is too restrictive. Also, there are those little revelations that do happen almost right away when reading a poem and you automatically think 'that was perfectly stated', which is that moment of clarity, a being clear. But a lot of the time these are just moments in an otherwise becoming clear. And it is for this reason that the argument that it is always the author's fault is invalid, because a lot of the time people will read something say to themselves 'well, I don't understand' and then that is that. To make declaritive statements like this seems self-defeating. Not to mention that I am not entirely convinced that a poem necessarily convey meaning. Meaning is a very abstract term and a lot of times poems convey a sense rather than a clearly defined meaning.
For me a poem I love touches something inside me that isn't always said outright, but in its entirety repeatedly brings me to that same place. If the words/image/metaphor are not clear enough they don't have that cumulative effect I am looking for.
