• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Poetry, it's meaning and intepretation.

spiderfrommars

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
36
MBTI Type
xNTP
Enneagram
8w7
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I think that if you get that out of a meaning the author didn't intend, then fine. But I do think whatever the author intended most often provides the most cohesion and beauty to the work. And I think building a poem around a definite and intentional theme is the best way to approach it, even if you don't quite understand the theme yourself.

Yeah, I think I was very dramatic in my statement. I actually do think works should have a definite theme– but not a definite interpretation. I have a poem which one person thinks it's about the American Civil War, and another thinks is about a person being betrayed by a close friend. What those interpretations have in common is the feeling of loss and abandonment, and of a sudden change that effects the outlook of the speaker permanently. So they're different interpretations, but they're not random, either. I think my original post implied that I was down with randomness, and I'm not, really. I just think the author's original intention is often vague, whereas the idea of a correct interpretation would suggest it's specific. That's not the case for me, and it doesn't seem to be the case for a lot of people I know.

I might be too vague in my intentions, perhaps to my detriment. It certainly makes me a poor fiction writer. (I don't write fiction seriously, but I do it frequently.)

Also, your signature cracks me up. :D
 

Kurt.Is.God

New member
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
227
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4W5
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I just think the author's original intention is often vague, whereas the idea of a correct interpretation would suggest it's specific. That's not the case for me, and it doesn't seem to be the case for a lot of people I know.

Exactly! When I write, I'm heading toward a general "theme" or "atmosphere", and when I go over it in my head I realize that the writing can stand in for many things that also fit the theme. Does that make sense? It's hard to explain... Your poem which could be about the Civil War or abandonment, for example, probably deals with something which both the Civil War and abandonment have in common.
 

spiderfrommars

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
36
MBTI Type
xNTP
Enneagram
8w7
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Exactly! When I write, I'm heading toward a general "theme" or "atmosphere", and when I go over it in my head I realize that the writing can stand in for many things that also fit the theme. Does that make sense? It's hard to explain... Your poem which could be about the Civil War or abandonment, for example, probably deals with something which both the Civil War and abandonment have in common.

Yeah! That's what I'm getting at. Atmosphere is a good word for what I'm usually aiming at. And there would be interpretations that would make no sense, like if someone said that poem was about Obama's '08 campaign. But there are many interpretations that make sense that I would never have thought of.
 
A

Anew Leaf

Guest
what-the-author-meant-what-your-english-teacher-thinks-the-author-meant.jpg

I always suspected as much.

I had an English teacher in 10th grade who ruined "lord of the flies" forever for me. We spent 4 months on it... Complete with a mock trial of the characters... I immediately volunteered to be a jury member but she saw through my ruse and put me down as a lawyer. Sigh.
 

Tallulah

Emerging
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
6,009
MBTI Type
INTP
I'm teaching poetry in my composition class right now, and I basically teach my students this:

--Any literature is a combination of meaning, intention and interpretation. It's a shared experience between the creator and the reader. So even if Sylvia Plath could resurrect and tell you exactly what she was thinking at the time, it doesn't mean that you cannot find other meanings in it. If studying literature was a big game of "find the author's sole intent," literary critics would be out of a job, and literature would be a good sight more boring to study.

--But it is our "duty," for lack of a better word, to look for the clues the poet has left. A poet's words are everything; they are his/her toolbox and mode of expression, and a poet isn't going to say "eh, close enough" when searching for the right word to convey meaning and intent. So we need to figure out the connotations of words, be aware of allusions and references (something my young students struggle with), glean intent from sounds, from meter, from rhyme, from hyperbole and onomatopoeia, and every other thing the poet has used to create that idea/feeling/social commentary.

--I do end up telling them a lot of what is in a poem, simply because they're new at this and they have less exposure to the vocabulary and references that I do, and they have limited practice with interpreting poetry. But I have always stressed to them that they can have any interpretation that they are able to support with the text. It doesn't have to be mine. But there has to be a basis for their particular reading in the poem itself.

--I run into several students that I think must have been me in high school. I didn't know anything about interpreting literature, and had a hard time trusting that the author actually intended all that deep meaning. It seemed like my teachers were just making a big deal out of a story/poem. With a lot more practice and exposure, I've developed an appreciation of literature and criticism, and can find meaning where there was none before. I was just taking things far too literally, and cheating myself out of the richness of the experience.

--You can trust the stuff that's in the literary canon, for the most part. It will stand up to scrutiny. But there's also a lot of bad writing out there, so don't let anyone fool you into thinking that just because it rhymes that it's poetry.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
Dead Poets

As opposed to other forms of art? Or are you talking more about art generally? And what do you mean by "does nothing"?

One of our greatest poets, W.H.Auden, told us that, "Poetry does nothing". And it was he who revealed the secret at the dead heart of poetry.

Most instinctively dislike poetry and always ask plaintively, "'But what does it mean?".
 

SilkRoad

Lay the coin on my tongue
Joined
May 26, 2009
Messages
3,932
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
One of our greatest poets, W.H.Auden, told us that, "Poetry does nothing". And it was he who revealed the secret at the dead heart of poetry.

Most instinctively dislike poetry and always ask plaintively, "'But what does it mean?".

“The poem comes in the form of a blessing—‘like rapture breaking on the mind,’ as I tried to phrase it in my youth. Through the years I have found this gift of poetry to be life-sustaining, life-enhancing, and absolutely unpredictable. Does one live, therefore, for the sake of poetry? No, the reverse is true: poetry is for the sake of the life.” -Stanley Kunitz, former US Poet Laureate

"Poetry is a sort of homecoming" -Paul Celan (one of the greatest poets of...everything, but particularly known for Holocaust poetry)


I can't help feeling sorry for those who are too lazy or uninterested to come up with anything but the "but what does it mean" cop-out. I am not joking when I say that to me, poetry is the most potentially meaningful art form there is. At its best, it is illuminating, truthful and precise like nothing else.

Poets have been persecuted in countries with restrictive regimes and continue to have this experience. They often represent the people in difficult times. In such places, poetry is anything but meaningless.
 

animenagai

New member
Joined
Aug 22, 2008
Messages
1,569
MBTI Type
NeFi
Enneagram
4w3

That actually makes heaps of sense. It's fine to analyse art, but a lot of high school English teachers just fish for stuff that isn't there. A good metaphor, a good symbol should be powerful. It should be plain for intellectuals to understand. Like I appreciate the statue of liberty as a metaphor because its delivery is so simple. It's a woman (a historically under-appreciated group) holding a torch (a symbol of power). You can understand why it's called the statue of liberty just from looking at it. Sometimes people over-analyse the wrong parts in a work of art and just make up shit the creator had no intention of conveying, and they hence miss what's really trying to be said.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
Mocking the Virgin Mary

I appreciate the statue of liberty as a metaphor because its delivery is so simple. It's a woman (a historically under-appreciated group) holding a torch (a symbol of power). You can understand why it's called the statue of liberty just from looking at it. Sometimes people over-analyse the wrong parts in a work of art and just make up shit the creator had no intention of conveying, and they hence miss what's really trying to be said.

Oh please! The Statue of Liberty is a copy of a statue of a prostitute enthroned in Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris during the French Revolution in order to mock the Virgin Mary.
 

The_Liquid_Laser

Glowy Goopy Goodness
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
3,376
MBTI Type
ENTP
That actually makes heaps of sense. It's fine to analyse art, but a lot of high school English teachers just fish for stuff that isn't there. A good metaphor, a good symbol should be powerful. It should be plain for intellectuals to understand. Like I appreciate the statue of liberty as a metaphor because its delivery is so simple. It's a woman (a historically under-appreciated group) holding a torch (a symbol of power). You can understand why it's called the statue of liberty just from looking at it. Sometimes people over-analyse the wrong parts in a work of art and just make up shit the creator had no intention of conveying, and they hence miss what's really trying to be said.

Yes this is it exactly!

Modern poetry, for the most part, is a dead art. Modern poets mostly write for other poets. News-flash for poets: if non-poets can't get the poetry then it sucks. Also most people's impression of poetry comes from analyzing the meaning in English class. This completely misses the point.

Poetry is not meant to be read. It is meant to be heard. It should be spoken out loud with feeling. Poetry is meant to be somewhat like watching a monologue. In depth analysis of a poem = FAIL for most classes. This will not make you appreciate a poem. Analysis is really only for people who want to actually be poets. Appreciation, on the other hand, comes from listening to it out loud. If a non-poet has to do an in-depth analysis to understand the poem then it sucks.

The beatniks had it right when they were doing poetry readings. That is how poems were meant to be experienced. Langston Hughes, for example, mades some good poetry, because the power of his words hits you as you listen to it out loud. English classes have sucked all the enjoyment out of poetry though the same way they've sucked the life out of Shakespeare. Shakespeare is not literature. It's meant to be performed in a play. (Bill Shakespeare didn't even write out coherent scripts. They were just fragments that people compiled later.) Likewise poetry is not meant to be read. It's meant to be heard by someone who is speaking with emotional power.
 

SilkRoad

Lay the coin on my tongue
Joined
May 26, 2009
Messages
3,932
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Yes this is it exactly!

Modern poetry, for the most part, is a dead art. Modern poets mostly write for other poets. News-flash for poets: if non-poets can't get the poetry then it sucks. Also most people's impression of poetry comes from analyzing the meaning in English class. This completely misses the point.

Poetry is not meant to be read. It is meant to be heard. It should be spoken out loud with feeling. Poetry is meant to be somewhat like watching a monologue. In depth analysis of a poem = FAIL for most classes. This will not make you appreciate a poem. Analysis is really only for people who want to actually be poets. Appreciation, on the other hand, comes from listening to it out loud. If a non-poet has to do an in-depth analysis to understand the poem then it sucks.

The beatniks had it right when they were doing poetry readings. That is how poems were meant to be experienced. Langston Hughes, for example, mades some good poetry, because the power of his words hits you as you listen to it out loud. English classes have sucked all the enjoyment out of poetry though the same way they've sucked the life out of Shakespeare. Shakespeare is not literature. It's meant to be performed in a play. (Bill Shakespeare didn't even write out coherent scripts. They were just fragments that people compiled later.) Likewise poetry is not meant to be read. It's meant to be heard by someone who is speaking with emotional power.

But this is not an entire perspective. It's fine if that is your way of appreciating poetry, but you should realise that there are many of us who come at it from different directions. I love hearing poetry spoken well out loud and there are poems which are best appreciated that way. (I am working on an anthology currently of poems which speak well, for examinations in reciting poetry aloud.) There are equally (or even more) marvellous poems which are best read silently to oneself. It's different approaches, different styles. I can't see how you can make a blanket statement like "poetry is not meant to be read." Some of us appreciate it most by a combination of analysis and enthusiasm. It works well for me. The best poetry touches me both emotionally and intellectually. It is a complex experience which is also totally intuitive and instinctive. That's what makes it so great.

There are so many poems which I've appreciated a bit when I've read them quickly on a surface level - then when I've spent some more time unpacking, looking at it from different directions, etc I appreciate it far, far more.

Plus - are you saying that Shakespeare didn't come up with plots/characters for his plays and other people put them together from little bits and pieces he'd written? :huh:
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
But this is not an entire perspective. It's fine if that is your way of appreciating poetry, but you should realise that there are many of us who come at it from different directions. I love hearing poetry spoken well out loud and there are poems which are best appreciated that way. (I am working on an anthology currently of poems which speak well, for examinations in reciting poetry aloud.) There are equally (or even more) marvellous poems which are best read silently to oneself. It's different approaches, different styles. I can't see how you can make a blanket statement like "poetry is not meant to be read." Some of us appreciate it most by a combination of analysis and enthusiasm. It works well for me. The best poetry touches me both emotionally and intellectually. It is a complex experience which is also totally intuitive and instinctive. That's what makes it so great.

I agree that everyone will have their own preferences and modes of appreciation re. any sort of artform; that what speaks to one person will not speak to another, and that people will interpret in different ways, will access in different ways, will be impacted in different ways. However, for myself, poetry will never be how you or others in this thread describe it can be or is 'intended' to be. I can attempt to intellectually appreciate it, and can be..almost envious? , although that's not the right word (curious/intrigued, certainly), of those who it DOES speak to, because I wonder what that must be like - but it doesn't actually reach me on any other level and I am quite happy once I am done 'having' to be exposed to it.

I don't intend for this to be a judgment against it, because it's not; it's simply a fact that I don't care for it and it's never spoken to me on any level, really. No amount of classwork or exposure to it will cause me to spontaneously start wanting to access it. There are just many other avenues - other written mediums, music, other artforms, the world itself - that speaks to me much more powerfully and really draws me in. So yeah, to each their own - all of us are going to have different perspectives on it.
 

Forever_Jung

Active member
Joined
May 23, 2009
Messages
2,644
MBTI Type
ESFJ
I dislike the way people dismiss poetry offhand, and say: herpa derp, there's no way the author sat down and wrote all that obscure stuff on purpose, this is just another useless lesson. Dem teachers made me use my brain fer nuthin'!

Of course they didn't sit down and write all that weird stuff on purpose. If the purpose of all poetry was to express yourself as directly as possible, Beckett would have just said: "Damn, I'm lonely. And so is everyone else." Wordsworth would have said: "Trees are pretty. They make me happy." And Joyce would have said: "Look at me! I'm the best author ever! Everyone come read about how great I am!" And so, and so on.

You're not experiencing the subtlety of each message that a direct explanation could accomplish. You can't replicate some of the most complex feelings and ideas of human experience by just saying your message outright. The poem need to be ambiguous enough that people can put themselves into it, but not so ambiguous that it loses all shape or meaning. So to approach the creative process in such a self-conscious, direct way would sterilize its potency.

There's poetic nonsense, and then there's nonsense nonsense. The contents of our unconscious psyche seemed nonsensical, but I think our buddy Jung (among others) have managed to convince us that it is not the case. Even if the meaning isn't always apparent to the conscious mind, it doesn't mean it is meaningless.

Reading poetry like watching clouds, and saying what they look like. Except these clouds can reduce you to tears, make you laugh, or fundamentally alter the way you perceive the world.

You bring as much to the text as the author does. There's something to be said for "creative reading". Even if the poet himself says it's supposed to be about something in particular, it doesn't mean your interpretation is bad. It's like a repurposed invention: Play-doh was originally supposed to be some sort of wall cleaner, China was using gun powder for fireworks, and the internet, intended as some sort of information network is now a convenient source of free porn. Maybe your repurposed meaning adds something to a reading of the poem. Maybe it's kind of stupid. Or maybe it's even better than the original.

Poetry isn't some fucking nutshell you can just force open to obtain its contents. But trust me, there is something worthwhile inside of it. Do you REALLY think after all these years and after all these poems that everyone is just pretending that poetry matters to them?
 

The_Liquid_Laser

Glowy Goopy Goodness
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
3,376
MBTI Type
ENTP
But this is not an entire perspective. It's fine if that is your way of appreciating poetry, but you should realise that there are many of us who come at it from different directions. I love hearing poetry spoken well out loud and there are poems which are best appreciated that way. (I am working on an anthology currently of poems which speak well, for examinations in reciting poetry aloud.) There are equally (or even more) marvellous poems which are best read silently to oneself. It's different approaches, different styles. I can't see how you can make a blanket statement like "poetry is not meant to be read." Some of us appreciate it most by a combination of analysis and enthusiasm. It works well for me. The best poetry touches me both emotionally and intellectually. It is a complex experience which is also totally intuitive and instinctive. That's what makes it so great.

There are so many poems which I've appreciated a bit when I've read them quickly on a surface level - then when I've spent some more time unpacking, looking at it from different directions, etc I appreciate it far, far more.

Hey it's great that you enjoy poetry that way. However the vast majority of people do not enjoy poetry at all. Furthermore I am saying it doesn't have to be that way. Poetry was not always a dead art form, but that is what it is today. That is because poetry is only written to be enjoyed by other poets. I have the same criticism of painting as an art. Modern paintings are only meant to be enjoyed by other artists. If a non-poet enjoys poetry or a non-painter enjoys a modern painting it is something of an accident.

I could contrast this with music or film which are art forms that are still very alive. A person does not have to a musician or filmmaker in order to enjoy these media.

Plus - are you saying that Shakespeare didn't come up with plots/characters for his plays and other people put them together from little bits and pieces he'd written? :huh:

The exact methodology is not known. Most likely he had a good idea of how the play should go. Then he gave each actor their lines only (plus the line of the actor speaking just before). This is different from today where an actor will get a complete copy of the script. In Shakespeare's day there was no complete copy of the script. There were only the fragments that each actor had.

Many years later people started writing coherent scripts and they tried putting Shakespeare's scripts together from the old fragments. It can sometimes be difficult to put the play together just from these script fragments. There are at least 3 different versions of Hamlet out there each with a different length and sometimes putting scenes in entirely different places. I personally find it ironic that this is the sort of thing that is being studied as literature. :D
 
Top