Quote:
Originally Posted by Yves S L
to properly scope out how you are applying an emotional/intellectual distinction
|
Hi, Yves,
I have no need to proselytize about that distinction. If the distinction doesn't naturally strike you, you aren't likely to find value in it. It's a way I can understand my reactions to poems, and Damian's thread helped me notice that short poems, even those that aren't humorous, tend to feel intellectual/light to me. It appears to be a minority reaction--which is fine; I only regret taking others' time with something that's more idiosyncratic to me than I realized.
Your comment that a turn is necessary to create emotion interests me. I've been pondering it. There are all sorts of turns, of course, and most jokes rely on a type, a turn that confounds an expectation they've set up. I associate emotion more with images and actions, but some of the short poems in the two threads under discussion present images that don't touch me, possibly because the poems haven't prepared me for them (and then presented them with turns). I'll continue to ponder the connection between turns and emotion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W T Clark
Max, out of interest, do you have the same reaction to Mandelstam's poem?
|
Hi, W.T.,
Though I doubt my response will be of interest, it would feel dismissive not to answer.
I'm not connecting with the Mandelshtam poem, though I don't doubt its power to connect with other readers. My (lack of) reaction is something I can't easily understand or explain.
I agree that its approach, particularly in the first three lines, is not intellectual.
In case it hasn't been clear (and that last comment may make it even less clear), neither "intellectual" nor "light" are bad things for me.
I appreciate the serious thought you and others have given to my questions.