In light of my poem (and myself) being attacked mostly due to a misinterpretation of it and a friend of mine being told that her poem wasn't actually a poem, I wrote a blog and posted it on that site, which reads as follows:
It seems that some people like to believe they have the answers to all of life's questions, that the grey matter in others' eyes is black and white to them. There is no uncertainty in their minds. If another disagrees with their opinion (fact according to them), it's inevitable that the other individual is mistaken. There are certain scenarios where this is understandable, I suppose. If Person A contends that 4 + 4 = 7, Person B can speak matter-of-factly that Person A is incorrect. However, I don't understand how that black-and-white form of thinking can be directly applied to the world of art, which I (and others I know) have run into recently.
In recent days, I have been witness to two people (there are many others, I'm sure) whom believe they can accurately define poetry. If another writes a poem which does not meet their guidelines, that bit of writing does not constitute as poetry. In my opinion, I don't believe it is possible to define any one form of art and those that attempt to do so only limit that particular medium's full potential.
Looking to Webster for guidance, he/she/it/whatever says that "define" means:
"to state or set forth the meaning of (a word, phrase, etc.)"
So, these two before-mentioned individuals (and others) believe to know the meaning of poetry and if any one poem does not fit their criteria, that writing is not poetry. I find this to be utterly asinine.
If art were so confined, we would not have such diversity and would not have such masterpieces as we've been so fortunate to witness. Throughout its history, people have continually tried to define art and have continually been proven wrong. Whether it be through music, painting, cinema, writing, etc., artists have consistently tried to push the envelope a bit further and with much success. If trends, the media and/or critics state they should travel north, they're likely going to travel south. Art simply would not be art with such constriction.
Often times, art is about a connection - emotionally connecting with a person. Whether an English Professor, music instructor or art teacher would grade the work with an "A" is irrelevant to how that work connects with someone. An English book may set forth certain rules and guidelines to follow in order to appease teachers, but the book cannot set forth any such rules on how to concoct a piece of writing which will connect with a person emotionally. A musician may perform a song which is cringe-inducing in sound to many. A person may write a poem or short story which would receive a failing grade from most professors. If that song or story connects with a person, however, that's really what it's all about and just like one's personal emotions cannot be defined, neither too can art.
It seems that some people like to believe they have the answers to all of life's questions, that the grey matter in others' eyes is black and white to them. There is no uncertainty in their minds. If another disagrees with their opinion (fact according to them), it's inevitable that the other individual is mistaken. There are certain scenarios where this is understandable, I suppose. If Person A contends that 4 + 4 = 7, Person B can speak matter-of-factly that Person A is incorrect. However, I don't understand how that black-and-white form of thinking can be directly applied to the world of art, which I (and others I know) have run into recently.
In recent days, I have been witness to two people (there are many others, I'm sure) whom believe they can accurately define poetry. If another writes a poem which does not meet their guidelines, that bit of writing does not constitute as poetry. In my opinion, I don't believe it is possible to define any one form of art and those that attempt to do so only limit that particular medium's full potential.
Looking to Webster for guidance, he/she/it/whatever says that "define" means:
"to state or set forth the meaning of (a word, phrase, etc.)"
So, these two before-mentioned individuals (and others) believe to know the meaning of poetry and if any one poem does not fit their criteria, that writing is not poetry. I find this to be utterly asinine.
If art were so confined, we would not have such diversity and would not have such masterpieces as we've been so fortunate to witness. Throughout its history, people have continually tried to define art and have continually been proven wrong. Whether it be through music, painting, cinema, writing, etc., artists have consistently tried to push the envelope a bit further and with much success. If trends, the media and/or critics state they should travel north, they're likely going to travel south. Art simply would not be art with such constriction.
Often times, art is about a connection - emotionally connecting with a person. Whether an English Professor, music instructor or art teacher would grade the work with an "A" is irrelevant to how that work connects with someone. An English book may set forth certain rules and guidelines to follow in order to appease teachers, but the book cannot set forth any such rules on how to concoct a piece of writing which will connect with a person emotionally. A musician may perform a song which is cringe-inducing in sound to many. A person may write a poem or short story which would receive a failing grade from most professors. If that song or story connects with a person, however, that's really what it's all about and just like one's personal emotions cannot be defined, neither too can art.
Comments
Post a Comment