The relevance of modern poetry

"I'm worried that when I show intelligent people a contemporary poem which I think quite simple, they frequently find it baffling. We seem to have lost the art of speaking directly to the reader. Today's poetry is sophisticated, multi-layered and sometimes brilliant. But, when you are not waving but drowning, whose verses come into your mind?" - Merryn Williams, June 2003 - quotation taken from the editorial of The Interpreter's House, a small press magazine for poetry and short stories

Interesting words - and certainly not without truth. Another small press editor once told me that I had some good ideas, but that I needed to bury my meanings under a few more layers, and make the reader dig for them. I can't remember precisely how he worded it, but the advice was certainly along those general lines. Ironically, when I do write metaphorically, I can have problems with my work being taken too literally - and when I write literally, it is often assumed that I am being metaphorical. Misunderstandings aside, however, the question remains: Must poetry be obscure? Is modern poetry, in fact, too obscure, and not accessible to the general reader?

Well, it is a question of personal tastes. I don't think that there is any lack of accessible poetry out there. Perhaps such poetry is too readily dismissed by critics, however.  Who are poets today writing for - other poets, and those with an academic interest in poetry, exclusively? In many cases, sadly - yes. There is some middle ground, however. The layers of deeper meaning may well be present in poetry which also offers something on the surface level. Surely, in many respects, this is the ideal?  At the same time, most of us don't consciously think, "I'm going to be obscure today," or, "I'm going to write something really accessible." Inspiration doesn't quite work that way - and I still talk about inspiration in connection with writing, as it is not a "dirty word", as far as I am concerned. Whilst self-discipline is undeniably important, inspiration is vital - but probably the inspiration/self-discipline debate would require a blog post in its own right. I will add it to my mental "must blog about" list, which is growing daily!

Someone Like You

Okay, I need to get this out of my system, even if it makes me really unpopular, as no doubt it will. Am I the only one? Really, am I the only person out there who thinks that the Adele hit "Someone Like You" is completely ruined by the fact that she sings: "Never mind, I'll find someone like you"? Sorry, still don't get it!

To be honest, I loved that song when I first heard it, although I found it interesting that a whole Five Live radio phone-in about "lost loves" was initiated on the strength of one song, however heartfelt and moving it may be - especially since most people laugh in my face when I tell them that songs such as "Goodbye" and "Naked" by Deborah Gibson - also a singer-songwriter - are some of my favourites. Adele is a female singer-songwriter, composing love songs on a piano. So is Deborah! Don't tell me: "Oh yeah, but Debbie Gibson sang 'Shake Your Love' when she was sixteen, and we thought she looked silly, and the words were corny." Get over it! She's forty-one now, and has developed so much as a singer-songwriter. (Not that I don't love those early Debbie Gibson hits, personally!)

Anyway, going back to the Adele lyrics: I thought at first that she sang: "Never again will I find someone like you." To me, that would be perfect - if a little obvious. Then I realised that she was singing: "Never mind..." I actually hear a burst of Avril Lavigne in my mind now, when I hear the song: "...on to the next one" ("One of Those Girls"). I don't know precisely what Adele meant by those lyrics, and what I ultimately find more disturbing is that so many people are apparently relating to this as the ultimate love song, but don't seem particularly concerned by the fact that she is talking about replacing one person with another. Hardly romantic - and the chorus, for me, simply doesn't fit with, or do justice to, the rest of the song.

There. I've said it. I think that, having got that out of my system, I might actually start to enjoy the Adele hit again! I just had to say something. Song lyrics seem to get into my head more and more, and I feel sure that I spend much too long on this sort of analysis. Still, I suppose that that's the poet in me...

Poetry: fact or fiction?

This is a subject which has come up for me before, and I recently discussed this with a friend on Facebook. I felt that it deserved more attention, in the form of a blog post.

We all understand that novels contain fictional characters and events, but yet may contain many autobiographical elements. Why do so many people find it difficult to appreciate that fictional characters can also be used in poetry? I do write mainly autobiographical poems, increasingly so - and these are gradually becoming more personal/confessional, as I find it impossible to "hold back" - but I still write what I call "character poems". They do not have to be about me, or someone else I know, or a celebrity or historical figure. This doesn't make the poems "less real", as the emotions, and aspects of the characters - as in prose fiction - will often be very real. It is a different approach to writing, and an alternative way in which to explore various issues, emotions, and questions. Poetry is full of metaphors. Why not the occasional fictional, or even semi-fictional - or semi-autobiographical/semi-biographical - character? I wouldn't write only in rhyme or only in free verse. I am inspired by using a variety of poetic styles and techniques. I have also written prose fiction in the past. In fact, originally I wrote stories, and wasn't particularly interested in poetry, which perhaps goes some way to explaining why it would feel so natural for me to create fictional characters. Why wouldn't such characters find their way into my poetry from time to time?

I can only say that I try to ensure that all of my writing is authentic, but sometimes I can and do use "poetic licence" in order to achieve this. Truth is not merely factual. Truth is something much deeper, and more fascinating.

Next question: Does the reader need to know which of my own, or anyone else's, poems are based upon fact, and which contain fictional elements? Doesn't knowing exactly what a writer is talking about actually shatter the illusion on occasions? Taking music as an example - have you ever been disappointed to discover that those lyrics, to which you related on a particularly deep level, were about a completely different subject to the you had assumed? Possibly something quite mundane. Sometimes writers don't even know what they mean by a particular phrase, but it just comes to them, and they can't explain why or where from. Sometimes we start out thinking that we are writing about one subject, but feel, on reviewing our own work, that we have actually written about something completely different. Do we need to explain all of this for each poem? Does it help to do so, or does it destroy some of the magic? There is a whole creative process at work when we are writing poetry. Although I don't deny that it is sometimes interesting to know what inspired someone to write a particular piece, I still believe that poems should "speak for themselves" most of the time.

Why a new blog?

I just felt like it!  I was looking through "The Blog About Nothing" and it's such a mess, with different fonts throughout, and no real direction.  There are You Tube links for songs, some of which no longer play, and those are all mixed up with the other posts.  I would like to produce another blog along similar lines to the one that I used to have on blog.com.


Anyway, that's basically why I have set up this blog, but I'm just going to keep the other one sitting there, as I might want to view some of the video clips, if nothing else.  I might carry on posting You Tube clips on there occasionally, instead of cluttering up this blog.  See how it goes!!! x