Sorry about that, David. Part of it is probably that what you said was uncontroversial, so no one felt an overwhelming urge to voice agreement or disagreement - but it doesn't mean it was ignored. The Wendy Cope villanelle was cute. Congrats on getting your villanelle published in the Barefoot Muse.

I have at least one really bad villanelle-attempt lying around somewhere. If I can find it, maybe I should post it so we can identify exactly what makes a villanelle one of those bad ones.

David, Bugsy--

Didn't I respond to each of you at least once? (Well, I said I liked Bugsy's metaphor, at the least.) Of course, calling me a mean-spirited poseur has a way of getting my attention. Or writing a villanelle naming godawful villanelles after me. You know, stuff like that.

I don't mean to be coy... okay, I do mean to be coy, but you guys have been calm heads in this discussion, and your comments doubtless deserved more attention than they got. (I'll have to go through this thread again. The fact that David Upson and Michael Cantor have already responded while I type and I have no clue what they're saying doesn't help--not knocking either of them. There's Lo and Rose--hey there! If this becomes a new Middle East thread, my apologies to the good people of the Sphere, the Neo-Formalist establishment, the State of Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and my mother for giving birth to me.)

Quincy

David,
Doing something first is not why it's best.


If you do it as well it does mean that, and anyway Mondrian wasn't the first to paint squares.

Janet

Sorry Janet, I guess that was a poor example then. What I was trying to convey is that copying someone else’s voice (as opposed to being influenced by it) is not art, or at least not exceptional art. There is probably much room for disagreement with my take on it, though.

David

David,
I think that whoever manages to pin down the butterfly of "what is art" is probably going to start a chain reaction that will unwind the entire universe and beyond. Plenty of great creative work owes a heavy debt to something else and why not? Bach/Vivaldi, Braque/Picasso, Italian rinascente and Greek classical sculpture, most great 18th century English novelists and certainly the New York abstract expressionists. I think that's one of the best things about creative work. The way humans relate across place and time.
Janet

Actually Michael, if you post a couple of villanelles "for discussion" on the Mastery Board, you will likely get:

--a couple of stray comments on the villanelle as a form (probably pro or con);
--a comment or two from people who will say, "I've always loved/hated that villanelle"; and
--a long thread of people posting their 'favorite' villanelles with no explanation why or any attempt to analyze why these are 'masterful' examples of a form.

And forget any serious discussion of free verse on that board. Ain't gonna happen. Which may be one reason why almost no people who post regularly to the free verse board ever post to the Mastery board. Gee, I wonder why...

[This message has been edited by nyctom (edited November 20, 2006).]

Tom,
You don't get a lot of "serious discussion" about music from musicians either. They want to play it and show what they mean. "Serious discussion" isn't very interesting to performers. " Serious doing" is. It's hormonal really.
Janet

Hormonal?

Yeah, whatever.

Yes Janet, yet the debate continues to rage. I believe any definition (or definitions) arrived at must be very loosely applied. To attempt to apply any rigid standard when defining art must surely be folly of the highest order.

Not a lot of earlier poets left copious screeds about "why I write".

Universities need to train people to do it so that they can keep on keeping on. It can be good value but, unless their living depends on it, very few poets want to spend precious time away from what they want to do most. It's a career move.