Eratosphere Forums - Metrical Poetry, Free Verse, Fiction, Art, Critique, Discussions Able Muse - a review of poetry, prose and art

Forum Left Top

Notices

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Unread 07-01-2020, 05:28 AM
Aaron Novick Aaron Novick is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,626
Default

The sonnet is a tradition. My concern is with keeping that tradition alive. This requires that good sonnets continue to be written, which in turn requires that poets writing sonnets be allowed to respond organically to the existing tradition, which in turn requires that the boundaries of the "sonnet" be open-ended.

My question is whether the conservative can keep the tradition alive. My answer is no. The insistence on "categorization" rests on an inherently closed-ended understanding of sonnet-hood, and is appropriate only for a tradition already pronounced dead. I believe conservatives want to keep the tradition alive, but their method amounts to placing it in a coffin, which strikes me as... ineffective.

The same, by the way, is true of chess. Computers are so good at standard chess that the life in the game now resides, to a great extent, in strange variants where human ingenuity still has a chance. (It's also true of politics; those who lament the decline of "western civilization" and want to "conserve" it have no love for the open-ended mish-mash of traditions that have lived and thrived in the west—they want a narrow, closed-off, arbitrary, dead thing.)

So no, I am certainly not confusing poetic quality with poetic categorization.

Last edited by Aaron Novick; 07-01-2020 at 05:46 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Unread 07-01-2020, 06:56 AM
Mark McDonnell Mark McDonnell is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Staffordshire, England
Posts: 4,420
Default

Quote:
So no, I am certainly not confusing poetic quality with poetic categorization.
Fair enough, Aaron, I didn't see that post. It's been a long discussion. I was really responding to this sort of thing:

Quote:
As I see it, if you truly believe that the possibilities of the sonnet form were exhausted by the existing masters, and that you cannot do better, then you simply have no reason to write sonnets. If the form is dead, let it be, stop exhuming it for pointless exercises that waste everyone's time.

Only poets who believe the form is not exhausted—whether they are writing within the strict confines of the tradition or stretching it—have any business writing sonnets.
and

Quote:
The true lover of the sonnet must not seek to conserve it.
I completely agree with you, as I made clear in my first post, that the sonnet form is an organic and changing thing and that the category is a broad church. But I really don't agree with this characterisation above: that people who enjoy writing in fixed form, even people who believe that the form is perfect as it is, are "exhuming" something that is "dead" and "exhausted". That they have no business writing them, even. It misses the possibility that they believe the structure of the traditional forms, while fixed, might not be dead but very much alive, vibrant, and inexhaustible rather than "exhausted", or that they simply love it and that the important thing is what one does with it in terms of content.

I suppose where we differ, and what exhausts me, (and where I might differ from Kevin and Jayne also) is in the evangelism you seem to bring to the arguments around tradition and form and to the boring political inferences it seems to carry with it, as though 'conservatism' in poetry equalled conservatism in politics. The most famous advocate of the manifesto of "making it new" in 20th century poetry was also its most notable fascist sympathiser after all. (Perhaps I'm wrong, but I suspect you wouldn't be "swallowing an impulse to be snarky" with Kevin's views on the sonnet if you didn't already know his politics).

Quote:
The sonnet is a tradition. My concern is with keeping that tradition alive.
Don't burden yourself, Aaron. What will be will be, and people will write what and how they want. It seems to me that the "conservatives" are "losing" anyway (if we must see this as an extension of the bloody "culture war") and that the traditional sonnet is probably a much rarer, or certainly less fashionable, beast in the world of poetry journals than its non-traditional counterpart.

Last edited by Mark McDonnell; 07-01-2020 at 11:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Unread 07-01-2020, 07:28 AM
Aaron Novick Aaron Novick is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,626
Default

Mark, I did not say that folks who write in fixed forms believe that those forms are exhausted. (This would be a strange thing to say, since I write in fixed forms.) I did not miss the possibility that those fixed forms are inexhaustible. (This would be a strange thing to miss, since I write in fixed forms.) If you read the very words of mine you quoted, you'll see that I in fact quite clearly denied the first and acknowledged the second.

What I have been doing is criticizing a certain attitude toward form, which I think is a bad attitude. I do not believe that everyone who writes in strict form holds that attitude. In doing so I have been developing arguments. I have certainly not been evangelizing. I'd say I don't know where you got that idea, but I think I do. You wrote:
I am sure you would be swallowing an instinct to be "snarky" with Kevin if you didn't already know his politics.
You are just making things up, whole cloth, then interpreting my posts on that basis, and thus exhausting yourself with them. I promise you they are less exhausting if you read what they actually say.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Unread 07-01-2020, 07:35 AM
Aaron Novick Aaron Novick is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,626
Default

Cross-posted with your edit. The concern with which I am "burdening"* myself is an in-house dispute among those of us who write metrical poetry. Obviously form is on the downswing more generally, but that isn't a victory for the non-conservatives among us "formalists"—I would like to see more, and better, metrical poetry in the poetry mainstream. I won't say that a conservative attitude toward form is responsible for form's marginalized status, but I do think that it's not conducive to writing the sort of poetry that keeps form vibrant and alive and ripe for rediscovery.

*The burden, of course, being two-fold: writing formal poetry, which I enjoy, and chatting about it with other people who write formal poetry, which I also enjoy
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Unread 07-01-2020, 08:17 AM
Mark McDonnell Mark McDonnell is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Staffordshire, England
Posts: 4,420
Default

Quote:
You are just making things up, whole cloth, then interpreting my posts on that basis
Ooh. OK, so Kevin said

Quote:
I would say any poem that lives up to any of the traditions of Sonnets established by the great poets of the past, "Petrarchan" "Shakespearean" "Spenserian", etc.. is a sonnet. In other words, it needs to have a meter, line-length, and rhyme-scheme and volta according to the tradition it follows. You can't write a "Shakespearean Sonnet" if you don't follow the form that makes it "Shakespearean".

The best options for the sonnet are already, for the most part, established. Do you really think you can come up with something better than the traditions established by the best poets of the past?
and you replied (presumably to this point, since you mention him by name)

Quote:
My impulse is to be snarky, but I'll squelch it. Instead, I'll ask a serious question: what possible function does conservatism about form like Kevin's serve? (What follows doesn't address this immediately, but I'll get back around to it.)

As I see it, if you truly believe that the possibilities of the sonnet form were exhausted by the existing masters, and that you cannot do better, then you simply have no reason to write sonnets. If the form is dead, let it be, stop exhuming it for pointless exercises that waste everyone's time.

Only poets who believe the form is not exhausted—whether they are writing within the strict confines of the tradition or stretching it—have any business writing sonnets.
So my thought process was what "impulse to be snarky" has to be squelched here in what is simply a disagreement about poetry? If I was wrong to see an implication about the linking of Kevin's poetic conservatism with his political conservatism, I apologise. But, then I still don't understand your "snarky" comment.

Also in my thought process was that you take Kevin's fairly neutral word "established" (The best options for the sonnet are already, for the most part, established. Do you really think you can come up with something better than the traditions established by the best poets of the past? ) and rephrase his point with the word "exhausted" (As I see it, if you truly believe that the possibilities of the sonnet form were exhausted by the existing masters, and that you cannot do better, then you simply have no reason to write sonnets) which has very different connotations. You seem to be saying fairly clearly that holding the belief that the rules of the sonnet have been well established and don't much need to change is the same as admitting the sonnet is "dead" and "exhausted" and therefore the people who hold these views have no business writing sonnets. Which I disagreed with by making the point that the content is more important than the form, among other points. .

Later you say
Quote:
So, to return to the question: what function can Kevin's conservatism serve? (It's not just Kevin's, of course; we can be grateful to him for voicing a view held by many.)
This mistakenly labels as 'conservative' (which suggests a point of principle) the opinion that variations in the traditional sonnet forms haven't resulted in any significant poetic improvements (which is just an opinion based on one's aesthetic taste). It also, in the parenthesis, hints at the sort of sarcasm usually reserved for someone who has inadvertently revealed themselves to be a racist. Again, forgive me if I'm wrong.

Also, you made the link between poetic/political conservatism explicit when you said

Quote:
It's also true of politics; those who lament the decline of "western civilization" and want to "conserve" it have no love for the open-ended mish-mash of traditions that have lived and thrived in the west—they want a narrow, closed-off, arbitrary, dead thing.
And when I said you sounded evangelical, I suppose I was responding to this sort of thing :

Quote:
As so often, then, the conservatism that pledges fealty to a given tradition works primarily to ensure that it become a moribund thing—the conservative pledges fealty to a carcass.
which seemed a bit...much, perhaps, in its evocation of a style of heightened political rhetoric, for a discussion about poetic form. Especially when most people are agreeing with you and the most 'conservative' voice here (Kevin) had concluded his latest argument with the entirely inoffensive

Quote:
A good sonnet that only slightly varies the tradition of a sonnet is something I don't think anyone has any issues with. It is when a "sonnet" has more nonsonnet than sonnet in it, and only vaguely resembles a sonnet, instead of certainly fulfilling it, that it probably shouldn't be called a sonnet.
So, while I largely agree with your (rather than Kevin's) thoughts about the sonnet, I disagree that I'm "making things up whole cloth" with regard to the way you present your argument. Perhaps the problem is that I just don't feel the same passion as you do about the changing trends of the poetry world, or any obligation to keep any particular tradition alive. Those worries and responsibilities seem entirely beyond my reach. It's enough for me to worry about where my next poem is coming from and whether it will be any good.

(I'm aware of the irony of the length of this post, for someone who claims not to care about the issue)

Goddammit Aaron, we can argue about anything can't we, even when we basically agree? C’mon, say what you really think: "All Traditional Sonneteers Are Bastards"! Haha

Last edited by Mark McDonnell; 07-01-2020 at 04:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Unread 07-01-2020, 12:16 PM
R. S. Gwynn's Avatar
R. S. Gwynn R. S. Gwynn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Beaumont, TX
Posts: 4,749
Default

It announces itself as a broken sonnet, and that's exactly what it is. Clever.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Unread 07-01-2020, 04:02 PM
Jayne Osborn's Avatar
Jayne Osborn Jayne Osborn is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Middle England
Posts: 6,950
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R. S. Gwynn View Post
It announces itself as a broken sonnet, and that's exactly what it is. Clever.
No, sorry, Spence's poem, however it chooses to announce itself, isn't any kind of sonnet, as far as I'm concerned; a ''broken'' sonnet is simply... well, something else, other than a sonnet.

Broken Sonnet: Divorce

I never knew the birds
The way she did –
To me, a cormorant appeared
To be an egret who shed
All his colors for black.
I forget if herons
Will mate for life. Do the males flock,
Or do they fly alone?
I need to find the name
Of one who leaves the land behind,
Making flight his home.
The wind
Will choose which feathers line a nest
And which glide into mist.

...Whereas one of my favourite sonnets, which doesn't rhyme and doesn't have a volta, but is in perfect IP, is by our own (wonderful) Julie Kane:

Used Book

What luck – an open bookstore up ahead
as rain lashed awnings over Royal Street,
and then to find the books were secondhand,
with one whole wall assigned to poetry;
and then, as if that wasn’t luck enough,
to find, between Jarrell and Weldon Kees,
the blue-on-cream, familiar backbone of
my chapbook, out of print since ’83 –
its cover very slightly coffee-stained,
but aging (all in all) no worse than flesh
through all those cycles of the seasons since
its publication by a London press.
Then, out of luck, I read the name inside:
The man I thought would love me till I died.

It doesn't comply with all of the usual 'rules' - but it's instantly identifiable as a sonnet, ...and it's a bloody good one too!!!

Compare and contrast the two poems.

Jayne
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Unread 07-01-2020, 04:02 PM
Julie Steiner Julie Steiner is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 8,307
Default

Here's an unannounced pair of substandard sonnets that I don't think anyone would contend would be better if they were perfectly Shakespearan or Petrarchan.

The secret to breaking the rules is simple: just be a genius, and you can get away with anything. The rest of us slobs have a harder time getting away with breaking the rules, because we have a harder time getting away with following them, too. We've all written mediocrities that tick all the sonnet requirements and still don't give anyone chills or take the top off of anyone's head.

Last edited by Julie Steiner; 07-01-2020 at 04:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Unread 07-01-2020, 04:40 PM
Mark McDonnell Mark McDonnell is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Staffordshire, England
Posts: 4,420
Default

Jayne, surely Julie Kane's sonnet does rhyme, in the traditional Shakespearean manner (though the three quatrains employ half-rhymes and consonant rhymes -- head/hand, street/poetry, enough/of, Kees/3, stained/since, flesh/press) and it finishes with a full rhyming couplet. And its volta is at L12, in the traditional Shakey fashion, with the revelation of who the book belonged to and the change of luck.

Julie, yes haha. Thing is, Owen didn't call it a 'double sonnet' or anything though did he? Just write the best poetry you can, is my view. I don't understand the wrestling over the soul of the sonnet from either end of the argument.

Last edited by Mark McDonnell; 07-01-2020 at 04:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Unread 07-01-2020, 04:42 PM
Roger Slater Roger Slater is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 16,476
Default

Ultimately, unless you are judging a sonnet contest and it would be fraudulent for you to collect entry fees and then give the award to a poem that should not have qualified, what difference does it make?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



Forum Right Top
Forum Left Bottom Forum Right Bottom
 
Right Left
Member Login
Forgot password?
Forum LeftForum Right


Forum Statistics:
Forum Members: 8,399
Total Threads: 21,841
Total Posts: 270,811
There are 1528 users
currently browsing forums.
Forum LeftForum Right


Forum Sponsor:
Donate & Support Able Muse / Eratosphere
Forum LeftForum Right
Right Right
Right Bottom Left Right Bottom Right

Hosted by ApplauZ Online