09-30-2019, 09:19 AM
Language study is already one layer away from the poem. You read the poem as impact, then you read it as critic. If it goes back to impact after read as critic, it's a poem. If you read a poem as impact and read it as a critic at the same time, it's still a poem, and you're a different kind of reader. And the poem is different, and that's all the better for the poem, even negative. Language isn't anything like it looks like. There's almost something wrong in the sound of language the way it looks like.
I remember making points to Leanne about whether a poem should be read the same as it looks on the page. She favored the way it looks on the page. And I do too. I do, but I also favor reading it differently. I think seeing it on the page can have its effect, and reading it out loud can have its own different effect, not taking away or differing from the written effect. I assume she agreed at least somewhat, because she didn't contest me when I said that.
Like a song live. It doesn't take away from, maybe even enhances the album version. And like language. I talk and write depending on how I feel at the moment. And when I'm having to stick to the overall thing of some specific art thing, I talk or write within the how the specific art thing should be to be what it is.
As an example, I mean look at this recent thing: I wrote a whole post, using language and concepts to build up a context where it would make extraphilosophicalsociologicalpoetic sense for me to deliver the line, when it comes to hotness: Where does Zooey Deschanel end and the sun begin? . . . I mean, in some incarnation in some point in history, she has to at least give me a kiss on the cheek for working that into the social discourse. And funnily enough, you'd think there'd be hundreds of poetry sites, but there aren't that many. . . . So Zooey, if you're getting into poetry . . . if you're reading this. I was in love with you before you were married; and you've been married twice. So Zooey . . .
The point is: language is language, whether it's understood or not. I tends, and trends, to be more useful to the most of us when it is
It* [last line, post colon, sentence two]. . . . understood
I remember making points to Leanne about whether a poem should be read the same as it looks on the page. She favored the way it looks on the page. And I do too. I do, but I also favor reading it differently. I think seeing it on the page can have its effect, and reading it out loud can have its own different effect, not taking away or differing from the written effect. I assume she agreed at least somewhat, because she didn't contest me when I said that.
Like a song live. It doesn't take away from, maybe even enhances the album version. And like language. I talk and write depending on how I feel at the moment. And when I'm having to stick to the overall thing of some specific art thing, I talk or write within the how the specific art thing should be to be what it is.
As an example, I mean look at this recent thing: I wrote a whole post, using language and concepts to build up a context where it would make extraphilosophicalsociologicalpoetic sense for me to deliver the line, when it comes to hotness: Where does Zooey Deschanel end and the sun begin? . . . I mean, in some incarnation in some point in history, she has to at least give me a kiss on the cheek for working that into the social discourse. And funnily enough, you'd think there'd be hundreds of poetry sites, but there aren't that many. . . . So Zooey, if you're getting into poetry . . . if you're reading this. I was in love with you before you were married; and you've been married twice. So Zooey . . .
The point is: language is language, whether it's understood or not. I tends, and trends, to be more useful to the most of us when it is
It* [last line, post colon, sentence two]. . . . understood